GIFT   OF 
Arthur  E.   Moncaster 


RECE/VEB 


TUBE 


The 

MODERN   BOILER 

TUBE 


A  STORY  OF  ITS  EVOLUTION  AND 
DEVELOPMENT  A  SOME  EXPERT 
OPINIONS  ON  ITS  EFFICIENCY  A  ILLUS- 
TRATED BY  STANDARD  MILL  TESTS 


NATIONAL    TUBE     COMPANY 

GENERAL      OFFICES:        PITTSBURGH,      PENN. 


DISTRICT  SALES  OFFICES 

ATLANTA  NEW  ORLEANS  PITTSBURGH 

CHICAGO  NEW  YORK  ST.  LOUIS 

DENVER  PHILADELPHIA  SALT  LAKE  CITY 

PACIFIC  COAST  REPRESENTATIVES 
U.  S.  STEEL  PRODUCTS  COMPANY:  SAN  FRANCISCO  SEATTLE  PORTLAND  LOS  ANGELES 

EXPORT  REPRESENTATIVES 
U.  S.  STEEL  PRODUCTS  COMPANY,    NEW  YORK  CITY 


A  chain  is  no  stronger  than 
its  weakest  link  —  a  boiler 
no  stronger  than  its  flues 


Table  of  Contents 

Introduction  —  Historical  Sketch       .      .      .  Page    3 

Tests  Applied  to  Boiler  Tubes    ....  "        7 

Standard  Specifications "        9 

Summary    of    Proceedings,    I.    M.    Boiler 

Makers'  Association "13 

Proceedings  1909  Convention      .      .      .      .  "      14 

Proceedings  1910  Convention      ....  "27 

Proceedings  1911  Convention      ....  "31 


/V33 


WE  feel  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  offer  any  detailed  explanation  pv  ,descHpt]6n,'  '®f;,t;he 
processes  employed  in  the  manufacture  of  steel  boiler  tubes,  these  having  been'  fully 
covered  in  other  publications  issued  by  this  Company  ("Modern  Welded  Pipe"  and  "Shelby 
Steel  Tubes  and  Their  Making").    This  book  was  primarily  designed  to  discuss  the  develop- 
ment and  characteristics  of  modern  boiler  tubes,  rather  than  as  a  treatise  on  their  manufacture. 

The  earliest  records  we  have  of  the  manufacture  of  wrought  iron  tubes  dates  back  to 
the  patent  of  Henry  Osborn,  of  Birmingham,  1812,  and  refers  to  the  manufacture  of  gun 
barrels  by  bending  wrought  iron  plates  over  a  circular  and  tapered  mandrel  and  welding  the 
heated  metal  thereon  under  a  tilt  hammer.  The  cessation  of  the  European  wars  left  a  large 
amount  of  this  material  on  the  market  which  was  used  as  gas  pipe  in  1815  during  the  early 
days  of  gas  lighting. 

The  extension  of  gas  lighting  called  for  cheaper  pipe  in  longer  lengths,  resulting  in  the 
first  approach  to  modern  butt  welding,  using  a  tilt  hammer  with  semi-circular  grooves  in  the 
die,  welding  the  heated  and  bent  plate  without  a  mandrel.  (James  Russell  patent,  1824.) 
In  the  following  year  the  hammer  was  dispensed  with  by  Cornelius  Whitehouse,  who  welded 
wrought  iron  strips  by  pressing  the  edges  of  the  skelp  together  by  drawing  through  dies — 
the  basis  of  the  butt-weld 
process  as  we  have  it  to-day. 

The  success  of  Geo. 
Stephenson's  first  locomo- 
tive in  1829  pointed  out  the 
necessity  for  a  stronger  tube 
and  the  problem  of  increas- 
ing the  strength  of  tubes 
by  lap  welding  received  the 

attention  of  inventors,  but  liiwg  /  •1111111 

it  was  not  until  about  1845  ' 

that  the  process  of  lap  weld- 
ing came  into  successful 
operation;  since  then  it  has 
been  vastly  improved  in 
detail. 


726315 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 

Seamless  steel  boiler  tubes  were  first  made  in  1885  by  piercing  solid  round  billets,  open- 
ing a  new  and  wider  field  for  tubular  goods.  A  few  years  later  soft  steel  was  successfully 
substituted  for  charcoal  iron  in  lap- weld  tubes. 

Since  Steplienson's  time  the  locomotive  tube  has  been  developed  step  by  step  with  the 
demands  of  locomotive  service  (the  most  severe  which  the  tube-maker  has  to  meet) ;  indi- 
rectly the  manufacture  of  tubes  for  merchant  and  marine  service  has  reaped  the  benefit  of 
the  extensive  experiments  made  to  meet  the  exacting  conditions  imposed  by  modern 
locomotive  practice. 

"\\  **The  eV01fl£lofri".pf  the  boiler  tube  is  comparable  with  the  developments  of  other  branches 
of  tne  jron  ^and  steej  m'dustry,  where  the  use  of  steel  has  gradually  superseded  the  use  of  iron, 
;fDtjrh£*€3a£o*!£  ihaiJt"ims' proved  better  fitted  to  meet  the  demands  of  modern  conditions. 

The  boiler  tube  of  to-day,  as  manufactured  by  this  Company,  is  the  result  of  forty  years 
of  constant  experiment  and  experience,  various  methods  and  materials  having  been  adopted 
and  discarded  in  turn  as  soon  as  their  limitations  were  found.  For  many  years  we 
made  all  boiler  tubes  of  charcoal  iron.  As  the  use  of  soft  steel  became  a  success  in  the 
manufacture  of  welded  pipe  it  was  tried  in  lap-welded  boiler  tubes  and  gave  satisfactory 
results.  In  the  meantime  seamless  steel  tubes  began  to  find  their  place  in  the  market  and 
charcoal  iron  tubes  became  almost  entirely  displaced  by  steel  in  the  merchant  tube  business. 
In  view  of  this  experience  and  the  opinion  of  practical  boiler  men  of  the  trade,  it  was 
decided  to  devote  our  entire  attention  in  the  boiler-tube  line  to  the  manufacture  of  steel 
tubes,  both  lap-welded  and  seamless. 

No  product  of  our  mills  must  stand  such  demands  in  service  as  the  locomotive  boiler 
tube  of  to-day.  It  is  the  weak  member  of  the  boiler,  on  the  stability  of  which  the  record 
of  the  locomotive  depends.  Recognizing  the  increasing  demand  on  modern  railroad  locomo- 
tives, we  have  endeavored  by  careful  experimenting,  assisted  to  a  large  extent  by  the  liberal 
policy  of  the  railroads  themselves,  to  better  adapt  the  tube  to  this  service.  Tubes  failed 
mainly  through  (1)  corrosion,  (2)  wearing  out  of  the  ends  or  breaking  off  the  bead  in  the 
flue-sheet,  due  to  repeated  working  of  the  tube  ends  in  the  effort  to  keep  them  tight  in  the 
flue-sheet. 

During  the  past  decade  the  manufacture  of  boiler  tubes  has  undergone  great  improve- 
ment so  that  to-day,  with  modern  blast  furnaces,  steel  works,  rolling-mills  and  manufacturing 
plants  especially  designed  for  this  industry,  the  steel  boiler  tube  is  now  much  better  than 
that  made  ten  years  ago.  We  find  it  expedient  to  use  the  same  grade  of  steel  for  both  lap- 
welded  and  seamless  locomotive  tubes,  namely,  the  steel  which  has  proved  by  experience  to 
be  best  adapted  to  severe  conditions  of  service  in  the  flue-sheet. 

The  first  mentioned  cause  of  failure,  corrosion  (usually  due  to  bad  water  conditions), 
was  met  by  giving  special  attention  to  the  uniformity  in  the  manufacture  of  the  steel  and  to 
the  working  of  the  metal  while  hot.  A  new  process  of  working  the  hot  bloom  was  devised 
which  gave  the  surface  portion  of  the  metal  a  continuous,  uniform,  dense  surface,  and  this 
has  been  found  to  benefit  the  tube  by  making  it  less  liable  to  local  corrosion,  or  pitting.  Soft 
steel  so  treated  was  found  to  corrode  more  uniformly  and  to  a  lesser  degree  under  natural 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


conditions*  than  charcoal  iron.  This  fact  has  been  abundantly  demonstrated  by  tests  made 
at  our  own  mills,  and  by  leading  railroads  in  all  parts  of  the  country  during  the  last  four 
years,  wherever  these  tubes  have  been  put  into  service  side  by  side  with  standard  charcoal 
iron.  Material  so  treated  has  become  known  as  "Spellerized  steel."  At  the  present  time  we 
are  treating  all  lap-welded  boiler  tubes  by  this  process. 

The  question  of  corrosion  having  been  practically  disposed  of  by  actual  experience 
investigation  was  continued  into  the  wider  field  of  flue-sheet  troubles.  Here  also  it  was 
found  by  laborious  comparisons  of  engines  operating  with  steel  and  those  operating  with 
charcoal  iron  under  the  same  conditions,  that  a  decidedly  better  mileage  was  obtained  with 
the  stronger  metal.  It  was  found,  however,  that  steel  for  tubes  must  be  carefully  made  for 
this  purpose  of  a  special  grade  of  open  hearth  quality,  moderately  low  in  phosphorus  and 
sulphur,  and  easily  weldable,  yet  not  so  soft  as  to  give  way  too  easily  under  the  roller  or 
prosser.  Failures  were  naturally  experienced  at  first,  and  doubtless  more  improvements  will 
follow,  but  one  of  the  leading  railroad  lines  shows  by  actual  record  of  more  than  a  hundred 
locomotives  that  the  durability  of  tubes  in  the  flue-sheet  has  been  increased  at  least  50  per 
cent,  on  the  average,  by  the  use  of  steel. 

The  following  extracts  from  reports  of  the  Special  Committee  on  Steel  versus  Iron  Tubes 
submitted  to  the  Convention  of  the  International  Master  Boiler  Makers' Association,  1909-10-11, 
may  be  of  interest  here  as  indicating  the  scope  and  results  of  some  of  these  locomotive  boiler 
tube  tests.  By  way  of  making  clear  what  the  system  of  inspection  and  testing  amounts  to 
in  the  manufacture  of  steel  boiler  tubes,  illustrations  are  shown  of  mill  tests  to  which 
these  tubes  are  now  regularly  subjected. 


*  The  practice,  advocated  by  some,  of  testing  different  grades  of  iron  and  steel,  by  placing  samples  for  an  hour  in  strong  acid,  has  not  been 
found  to  afford  results  comparable  with  natural  corrosion,  and  it  has  been  pointed  out  by  the  Committee  on  Corrosion  of  the  American  Society 
for  Testing  Materials  (see  following  extract)  in  their  report  for  1909,  that  when  so  used  the  acid  test  is  misapplied  and  may  be  very  misleading. 

ABSTRACT  FROM  REPORT  OF  COMMITTEE  ON  THE  CORROSION  OF  IRON  AND  STEEL, 
PROCEEDINGS  OF  THE  SOCIETY  FOR  TESTING  MATERIALS,  1910. 

It  has  come  to  the  attention  of  the  Committee  that  the  conditions  for  uniformity  in  carrying  out  an  accelerated  acid  test  to  determine  the 
rate  of  solution  as  a  possible  measure  of  tendency  to  corrosion,  which  was  contained  in  this  Committee's  report  of  1907,  has  been  misinter- 
preted by  some  as  a  standard  method  proposed  by  the  Committee.  This  is  not  the  case.  It  was  merely  the  intention  of  the  Committee, 
that  those  who  cared  to  make  such  an  acid  test  should  use  certain  uniform  conditions  as  to  concentration  of  acid,  size  of  specimen,  time  of 
immersion,  etc.,  in  order  that  the  results  thus  obtained  should  be  comparable,  with  a  view  of  determining  whether  the  results  of  such  a  test 
bore  any  relation  whatever  to  corrosion  as  observed  in  service.  The  results  so  far  obtained  show  that  the  test  is  not  generally  applicable,  and 
in  some  cases  may  be  very  misleading; 

Respectfully  submitted  on  behalf  of  the  Committee, 
W.  H.  WALKER,  ALLERTON  S.  CUSHMAN, 

Secretary  Chairman 

5 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Concerning  Spellerized  Steel 
Boiler  Tubes 

From  time  to  time  we  have  been  asked  various  questions  about 
the  SPELLERIZED  STEEL  BOILER  TUBE,  and  for  the  benefit  of  those  de- 
siring information,  we  answer  below  three  of  the  most  common  queries. 

No.  1.  What  are  the  specific  advantages  of  SPELLERIZED  STEEL 
BOILER  TUBES? 

No.  2.  How  does  this  steel  tube  compare  with  the  charcoal -iron 
tube  in  point  of  workability? 

No.  3.  In  actual  practice  is  it  more  difficult,  as  a  matter  of  manu- 
facture, to  get  uniform  material  in  iron  or  in  steel,  speaking  now  with 
reference  to  boiler  tubes? 

Spellerizing  is  a  process  of  roll-knobbling  steel,  while  hot.     This 

method  of  working  the  metal  has  the  effect  of  making  the  surface 
more  uniformly  dense,  hence  it  is  better  adapted  to  resist  corrosion, 
especially  in  the  form  of  pitting.  Experiment  and  practice  have  demon- 
strated that  SPELLERIZED  STEEL  BOILER  TUBES  will,  in  actual 
service,  resist  corrosion  at  least  as  well  as,  and  under  many  conditions 
better  than,  charcoal-iron  tubes. 

2  The  SPELLERIZED  STEEL  BOILER  TUBE  is  more  ductile  than  the 
charcoal-iron  tube,  and  lends  itself  to  manipulation,  distortion  and 
"punishment"  to  a  much  greater  extent,  and  at  the  same  time  has 
greater  toughness  and  strength.  For  instance,  in  experiments  to  deter- 
mine the  durability  of  the  SPELLERIZED  STEEL  BOILER  TUBE,  in  the 
flue-sheet  it  was  found  that  the  SPELLERIZED  STEEL  BOILER  TUBE,  when 
set  in  the  flue-sheet  in  the  ordinary  way,  would  withstand  at  least  fifty 
per  cent  reduction  in  gauge  under  the  roller  without  cracking.  Char- 
coal iron  will  rarely  withstand  twenty-five  per  cent  reduction  without 
failure. 

3  Methods  of  steel  making  are  now  so  improved  that  it  is  possible 
to  get  a  more  uniform  product  in  steel  than  in  iron,  and  the  tend- 
ency year  by  year  is  towards  further  improvement.  The  steel  tube 
of  to-day  is  far  better  than  the  steel  tube  of  ten  years  ago,  and  is  better 
than  any  iron  tube  we  have  ever  made.  Most  metallurgical  advances 
in  the  last  ten  years  have  been  along  the  line  of  improvements  in  steel, 
whereas  comparatively  few,  if  any,  have  been  made  in  the  line  of 
iron  improvement. 


THE 


MODERN 


BOILER 


TUBE 


Tests  Applied  to  Boiler  Tubes 

In  order  to  ascertain  that  the  quality  of  material  and  manufacture  are  satisfactory,  all 
boiler  tubes  are  subjected  to  severe  tests.  These  tests,  assisted  by  rigid  inspection,  insure 
that  steel  boiler  tubes  as  manufactured  by  this  company,  whether  intended  for  locomotive, 
stationary  or  marine  boilers,  will  give  satisfactory  service. 

A  flattening  test  is  made  on  both  crop  ends  of  each  lap-welded  tube.  This  test  is  used  to 
indicate  the  strength  of  weld  and  ductility  of  the  metal  and  a  guaranty  of  the  uniformity  of 
the  product. 

Every  boiler  tube  is  subjected  to  an  internal  hydrostatic  test  pressure  of  500  or  1,000 
pounds  pressure,  according  to  the  size  and  kind  (all  seamless  boiler  tubes  are  tested  to  1,000 
pounds  pressure). 

Details  of  tests  which  may  be  applied  to  boiler  tubes  are  given  in  the  specifications  pages  9 
and  11. 


Standard  Tests  on  Steel  Boiler  Tubes 


THE 


BOILER 


TUBE 


Test  of  Lap -Welded  Locomotive  Flues 

Every  SPELLERIZED  LAP-WELDED  LOCOMOTIVE  TUBE  is  given  a  special  test,  applied  to 
both  crop  ends. 

This  test,  illustrated  on  this  page,  combines  the  vertical  crushing,  horizontal  flattening 
and  flange  tests  on  one  piece.  A  special  machine  has  been  designed,  which  enables  the  test  to 
be  made  very  quickly,  and  as  crop  ends  are  used  the  cost  is  reduced  to  a  minimum.  If  the 
test  piece  opens  at  the  weld  or  elsewhere  the  tube  from  which  it  was  cropped  is  rejected.  If 
the  tube  stands  the  above  test  on  the  ends  the  regular  internal  pressure  test  is  then  applied. 


Special  Test  on  Spellerized  Lap -Welded   Locomotive  Tubes 

First  piece  to  the  left  shows  a  crop  end  of  a  Boiler  tube  (two  crop  ends  are  cut  from  every  SPELLERIZED  STEEL  LOCOMOTIVE  BOILER  TUBE) 

The  second  piece  shows  the  crop  end  laterally  crushed;  and  the  third  piece  shows  the  crop  end  crushed -vertically  with  a 

flange  turned  on  the  top.       It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  every  single  SPELLERIZED  BOILER  TUBE  for 

locomotive  service  receives  this  test  twice — once  on  each  crop  end — the  combined  test  being 

made  in  one  operation  while  the  piece  is  held  in  the  testing  machine. 


THE 


BOILER 


TUBE 


National  Tube  Company 

Specifications  for  Lap  -Welded  and  Seamless  Steel  Boiler  Tubes 
for  Merchant  and  Marine  Service 

Material 

Material  must  be  good  quality  soft  steel  rolled  from  solid  ingots.     Sufficient  crop  shall 
be  cut  from  the  ends  to  insure  sound  material. 


March  15,  1912 


Dimensions,  Weights  and  Test  Pressures 

Merchant  and  Marine  Boiler  Tube  Specification  No.  1 


Outside  Diameter,  Inches 

Thickness, 
Inches 

Thickness, 
Birmingham 
WTire  Gage 

Weight 
Per  Foot, 
Pounds 

Test  Pressure, 
Pounds 

Seamless 

T    „„      Wol.rl.n.r] 

Seamless 

Lap-Welded 

Hot  Finish 

J^tlJJ      TT  eitl^Vl 

Cold  Finish 

1 

.095 

13 

.918 

1,000 

\y± 

.095 

13 

1.171              1,000 

\y2          •  •  •  • 

.095             13 

1.425             1,000 

1%                \%              -095              13 

1.679             1,000 

750 

2 

2                   2 

.095             13 

1.932             1,000 

750 

<%\/. 

2*4               2^ 

.095 

13 

2.186             1,000 

750 

2  V2 

2i/£               2^ 

.109 

12 

2.783             1,000 

750 

%y± 

2%               2% 

.109 

12 

3.074             1,000 

750 

3 

3                   3 

.109 

12 

3.365 

1,000 

750 

3M 

3M               334 

.120             11 

4.011             1,000 

750 

3^2 

Q  1    /                                         O  1    / 

o  /  o                    o  /  o 

.120             11 

4.331 

1,000 

750 

3% 
4 

3%               3% 
4                   4 

.120             11 
.134             10 

4.652 
5.532 

1,000 
1,000 

750 
750 

41^ 

41A           41A 

.134 

10 

6.248             1,000 

500 

5 

.     5                   5 

.148 

9 

7.669 

1,000 

500 

6 

.165 

8 

10.282 

500 

7 

.165               8 

12.044 

500 

8 

.165               8 

13.807 

500 

9 

.180               7 

16.955 

500 

10                  .203               6 

21.240 

500 

11                  .220               5 

25.329 

500 

12                  .229 

4j/2 

28.788 

500 

13 

.238 

4 

32.439 

500 

The  permissible  variation  in  weight  is  5  per  cent,  above  or  5  per  cent,  below  that  given  in  table. 

9 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 

Inspection 

(a)  Tubes  shall  have  a  reasonably  smooth  surface,  free  from  injurious  pits,  laminations, 
cracks,  blisters  or  imperfect  welds;  they  shall  also  be  free  from  kinks,  bends  and  buckles, 
signs  of  unequal  contraction  in  cooling  or  injury  during  manufacture. 

(6)  The  thickness  of  the  wall  shall  not  vary  more  than  10  per  cent  above  or  below  the 
gauge  specified,  except  at  the  weld,  where  .015  inch  extra  thickness  will  be  allowed. 

(c)  Tubes  shall  not  vary  more  than  one-half  (j/0  of  one  per  cent  either  way  from  being 
round  or  true  to  the  mean  outside  diameter,  except  in  the  smaller  sizes,  where  a  variation  of 
.015  of  an  inch  will  be  accepted. 

(d)  Tubes  shall  not  be  shorter  than  the  length  ordered,  nor  more  than  .125  inch  longer. 

Physical  Tests 

FLATTENING  TEST:  A  section  three  (3)  inches  long  shall  stand  hammering  flat,  cold, 
until  the  inside  walls  are  within  three  times  the  thickness  of  the  material  without  cracking 
at  the  bend  or  elsewhere.  In  case  of  Lap- Welded  tubes  for  Marine  work,  the  bend  at  one  side 
shall  be  made  in  the  weld. 

FLANGING  TEST:  For  Marine  purposes  on  Lap- Welded  tubes  four  (4)  inches  and  smaller, 
and  on  all  sizes  of  seamless  tubes,  a  flange  three-eighths  (^6)  of  an  inch  wide  shall  be  turned 
over  at  right  angles  to  the  body  of  the  tube  without  showing  crack  or  opening  at  the  weld. 

INTERNAL  PRESSURE  TEST:  Each  tube  shall  be  subjected  by  the  manufacturer  to  an 
internal  hydrostatic  pressure  for  the  respective  size  and  gauge,  as  given  in  table  of  Dimensions, 
Weights  and  Test  Pressures. 

General  Requirements 

In  addition  to  the  above  tests,  each  tube  when  inserted  in  the  boiler  must  stand  expanding 
and  flanging  where  required  without  cracking  or  opening  at  the  weld.  Tubes  which  fail  in 
this  way  may  be  returned  to  the  manufacturer. 

A  certificate  of  test  shall  be  furnished  the  purchaser  of  each  lot  of  tubes  for  Marine  service, 
describing  the  kind  of  material  from  which  the  tubes  were  made,  and  that  the  tubes  have  been 
tested  and  have  met  all  the  requirements  prescribed  by  the  Board  of  Supervising  Inspectors, 
Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  Steamboat  Inspection  Service. 

All  tests  to  be  made  at  place  of  manufacture. 


10 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 

American  Society  for  Testing  Materials 

Locomotive  Materials 

Specifications  for  Lap  -Welded  and  Seamless  Steel  Boiler  Tubes 
and  Safe  Ends,  2^  Inches  Diameter  and  Under 

Manufacture 

1.  The  steel  shall  be  made  by  the  open-hearth  process. 

Chemical  Properties  and  Tests 

2.  The  steel  shall  conform  to  the  following  requirements  as  to  chemical  composition: 

Carbon not  over  0.15  per  cent 

Manganese 0.30  —  0.50  per  cent 

Phosphorus not  over  0.04  per  cent 

Sulphur not  over  0.045  per  cent 

3.  (a)  Analyses  of  two  tubes  in  each  lot  of  250  or  less  shall  be  made,  and  these  analyses 
shall  conform  to  the  requirements  specified  in  Section  2.    Drillings  for  analyses  shall  be  taken 
from  several  points  around  each  tube. 

(6)  If  the  analysis  of  only  one  tube  does  not  conform  to  the  requirements  specified, 
analyses  of  two  additional  tubes  from  the  same  lot  shall  be  made  and  each  of  these  shall 
conform  to  the  requirements  specified. 

Physical  Properties  and  Tests 

4.  A  test  specimen  not  less  than  4  inches  in  length  shall  have  a  flange  3/8  inch  wide 
turned  over  at  right  angles  to  the  body  of  the  tube  without  showing  cracks  or  flaws. 

5.  A  test  specimen  4  inches  in  length  shall  stand  hammering  flat  until  the  inside  walls 
are  in  contact,  without  cracking  at  the  edges  or  elsewhere.    For  lap-welded  tubes,  care  shall 
be  taken  that  the  weld  is  not  located  at  the  point  of  maximum  bending. 

6.  A  test  specimen  2j/£  inches  in  length  shall  stand  crushing  flat  longitudinally  without 
showing  cracks  or  flaws. 

7.  Tubes  of  Nos.  9,  10  and  11  B.\v.g.  shall  stand  an  internal  hydraulic  pressure  of  1,000 
pounds  per  square  inch,  and  tubes  of  Nos.  12  and  13  B.w.g.  an  internal  hydraulic  pressure  of 
900  pounds  per  square  inch. 

8.  (a)  Test  specimens  shall  consist  of  sections  cut  from  a  tube.    They  shall  be  smooth 
on  the  ends  and  free  from  burrs. 

(6)  All  specimens  shall  be  tested  cold. 

9.  One  flange,  one  flattening,  and  one  crush  test  shall  be  made  from  each  of  two  tubes 
in  each  lot  of  250  or  less.    Each  tube  shall  be  subjected  to  the  hydraulic  test. 

10.  If  the  results  of  the  physical  tests  of  only  one  tube  do  not  conform  to  the  require- 
ments specified  in  Sections  4,  5  or  6,  retests  of  two  additional  tubes  from  the  same  lot  shall 
be  made  and  each  of  these  shall  conform  to  the  requirements  specified. 

11 


THE 


MODERN 


BOILER 


TUBE 


Standard  Weights 
r  tubes  of  various  out 

Table  of  Standard  Weights 


11.     The  standard  weights  for  tubes  of  various  outside  diameters  and  thicknesses  are 
as  follows: 


Thickness 


Weights,  Lbs.  per  Ft.  of  Length  —  Outside  Diam.,  In. 


Nearest  B.  w.'g. 

Inches 

1% 

2 

214 

VA 

13 

0.095 

1.68 

1.93 

2.19 

2.44 

12 

0.110 

1.93 

2.22 

2.51 

2.81 

11 

0.125 

2.17 

2.50 

2.84 

3.17 

10 

0.135 

2.33 

2.69 

3.05 

3.41 

9 

0.150 

2.56 

2.96 

3.36 

3.77 

12.  The  weight  of  the  tubes  shall  not  vary  more  than  5  per  cent  from  that  specified  in 
Section  11. 

Workmanship  and  Finish 

13.  (a)  The  finished  tubes  shall  be  circular  within  0.02  inch  and  the  mean  outside 
diameter  shall  not  vary  more  than  0.015  inch  from  the  size  ordered.      They  shall  not  be 
shorter  than  the  length  ordered,  but  may  exceed  it  by  0.125  inch. 

(b)  For  lap-welded  tubes,  the  thickness  at  any  point  shall  not  vary  more  than  0.01 
inch  from  that  specified,  except  at  the  weld,  where  an  additional  thickness  of  0.015  inch 
shall  be  allowed. 

For  seamless  tubes,  the  thickness  at  any  point  shall  not  vary  more  than  10  per  cent 
from  that  specified. 

14.  The  finished  tubes  shall  be  free  from  injurious  seams,  flaws,  or  cracks,  and  shall 
have  a  workmanlike  finish.    They  shall  be  free  from  kinks,  bends  and  buckles. 

Marking 

15.  The  name  or  brand  of  the  manufacturer,  and  "Tested  at  1,000  pounds"  for  Nos. 
9,  10  and  11  B.w.g.,  or  "Tested  at  900  pounds"  for  Nos.  12  and  13  B.w.g.,  shall  be  legibly 
stenciled  in  white  on  each  tube. 

Inspection  and  Rejection 

16.  The  inspector  representing  the  purchaser  shall  have  free  entry,  at  all  times  while 
work  on  the  contract  of  the  purchaser  is  being  performed,  to  all  parts  of  the  manufacturer's 
works  which  concern  the  manufacture  of  the  material  ordered.     The  manufacturer  shall 
afford  the  inspector,  free  of  cost,  all  reasonable  facilities  to  satisfy  him  that  the  material  is 
being  furnished  in  accordance  with  these  specifications.     All  tests  and  inspections  shall  be 
made  at  the  place  of  manufacture  prior  to  shipment,  and  shall  be  so  conducted  as  not  to 
interfere  unnecessarily  with  the  operation  of  the  works. 

17.  Tubes  when  inserted  in  the  boiler  shall  stand  expanding  and  beading  without  show- 
ing cracks  or  flaws,  or  opening  at  the  weld.    Tubes  which  fail  in  this  manner  shall  be  rejected, 
and  the  manufacturer  shall  be  notified. 


THE 


MODERN 


BOILER 


TUBE 


'Steel  vs.  Iron  Flues' 

Summary  of  Data   Presented   at    International   Master   Boiler 
Makers'  Association  Conventions,  1909,  1910  and  1911 

The  proceedings  of  these  three  Conventions  on  the  subject  of  boiler  tubes  are  reproduced 
in  the  following  pages.  For  the  convenience  of  those  interested  in  the  subject  and  too  busy 
to  read  all  the  details,  the  main  conclusions  have  been  condensed  into  a  few  paragraphs  under 
the  following  topics : 

CORROSION  AND  PITTING:  Twenty  opinions  on  this  subject^  are  nearly  equally  divided, 
the  experience  of  six  members  indicating  that  the  steel  pits  less  than  the  iron,  while  as  many 
went  on  record  with  just  the  opposite  opinion,  and  the  remaining  eight  considered  the 
two  materials  to  be  equally  affected.  Several  men  of  wide  experience  prefer  iron  for  body 
tubes,  because  of  supposed  superiority  in  resisting  corrosion,  yet  recommend  steel  for  safe 
ending  where  the  material  is  really  subject  to  more  severe  conditions  of  service. 

The  view  of  eight  of  the  members  that  iron  and  steel  are  about  equally  resistant  to 
corrosion,  under  the  usual  conditions  of  service,  would  appear  to  be  a  reasonable  conclusion. 
In  1901-2  the  United  States  Navy  Steam  Engineering  Department  conducted  extensive 
tests  which  indicate  that  there  is  relatively  little  difference  in  the  corrosion  loss  of  tube  mate- 
rials : 

Loss  grams  per  Sq.  In.  in  aerated 

distilled  water,  comparing  with 

iron  as  100  per  cent. 

93.7  per  cent 

94.5  per  cent 

101.3  per  cent 

100.0  per  cent 


1.  Hot  drawn  seamless  open-hearth  steel 

2.  Lap- weld  Bessemer  steel     .... 

3.  Cold  drawn  seamless  open-hearth  steel 

4.  Charcoal  iron 


MILEAGE  AND  EFFICIENCY:  The  greater  part  of  the  evidence  presented  refers  to  this 
subject  rather  than  to  corrosion.  The  experience  of  one  of  the  largest  railway  systems  is 
typical :  a  test  including  ten  locomotives,  five  passenger  and  five  freight,  each  equipped  with 
iron  and  steel  tubes,  shows  the  steel  to  have  given  an  average  additional  mileage  over  the  charcoal 
iron  of  40,400  in  case  of  passenger  engines  and  of  23,700  for  freight  engines  (page  16) ;  while 
in  another  case  it  was  found  that  twenty-eight  freight  locomotives  averaged  25,000  miles 
more  with  steel  tubes  than  had  been  attained  previously  with  iron  tubes  under  the  same 
conditions  (page  28).  On  another  system  iron  flues  in  the  passenger  service  afforded  55,000 
to  65,000  miles  between  "shoppings,"  wrhile  steel  gave  110,000  to  148,000  miles.  Seventeen 
members  favor  the  modern  steel  tube  for  efficiency,  five  are  opposed  to  this  and  ten  report 
equally  good  results  with  the  two  materials,  so  that  most  of  the  evidence  favors  steel  tubes. 

CONCLUSION  :  The  idea  has  been  advanced  that  the  pitting  of  iron  and  steel  is  preventable 
to  a  great  extent  (page  26);  and  it  is  generally  accepted,  according  to  this  discussion,  that 
steel  tubes  expand  and  bead  into  the  flue  sheet  better  and  hold  their  position  more  perma- 
nently than  iron,  are  stronger,  of  smoother  finish  and  truer  to  size  and  gauge  than  the  older 
material;  also  with  ordinary  care  they  are  welded  with  as  good  results  as  iron;  and  finally, 
that  their  service  efficiency  is  higher,  so  that  the  statement  of  one  of  the  members  that  "steel 
flues  are  the  coming  thing"  (page  32),  seems  to  aptly  express  the  trend  of  opinion  at  these 
meetings. 

13 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Official  Report 

and  Discussion  of  Report  of  the  Special  Committee  on 

Steel  vs.  Iron  Flues 

before  the  International  Master  Boiler  Makers'  Association  in  Convention  at  Louisville,  April  27-30,  1909 

(See  pages  150  to  166  of  Official  Proceedings) 

Fourth  Day's  Session 

The  Convention  met  pursuant  to  adjournment  at  9:30  A.  M.  and  was  called  to  order  by 
the  President. 

The  President:  The  first  order  of  business  this  morning  is  the  report  from  the  Com- 
mittee on  Steel  versus  Iron  Flues. 

Report  of  Committee  on  Steel  vs.  Iron  Flues 

Mr.  O'Connor:  I  wish  to  make  a  few  explanations  before  this  report  is  read.  You  will 
note  in  the  body  of  the  report  when  read  that  my  experience  has  been  very  limited  with  the 
steel  flues,  consequently  I  can  say  at  this  time  but  little  concerning  these  two  metals.  On 
the  Chicago  &  Northwestern  lines  west  of  the  Missouri  River  we  have  had  since  May,  1909, 
several  locomotives  equipped  with  the  steel  and  iron  flues,  half  and  half  in  each  locomotive. 
Up  to  date  we  have  not  had  occasion  to  remove  any  of  them,  either  the  iron  or  the  steel, 
from  our  boilers.  From  reports  received  from  time  to  time  we  cannot  complain  of  the  service 
given  from  either  the  iron  or  the  steel  flues,  both  giving,  so  far,  good  satisfaction.  I  have, 
however,  made  personal  inspection  of  the  flues  in  the  fire-box  of  a  few  of  the  engines,  and  by 
close  observation  relative  to  the  flue  bead  at  fire-box  end  I  found  the  steel-flue  bead  to  have 
a  little  advantage  over  the  iron  bead,  as  the  steel  bead  remains  closer  and  firmer  to  the  flue- 
sheet  surface  than  the  iron  bead.  That  is  all  the  material  difference  I  could  note  between 
the  two  metals. 

By  the  time  of  our  next  Convention  in  1910,  I  will,  in  all  probability,  have  removed 
some  of  these  experimental  flues  from  the  engines  so  equipped,  and  then  I  can  make  a  more 
complete  report,  giving  the  accurate  service  and  general  condition  of  the  two  metals  as  found 
in  our  section  of  the  western  country.  We  must  not  forget  that  water  conditions  are  not  the 
same  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  and  in  that  respect  we  must  depend  on  what  will  be  brought 
forth  from  a  thorough  test  of  actual  service. 

Therefore,  I  will  say  that  in  my  short  experience  with  these  two  metals  I  would  consider 
this  report  that  will  be  read  before  you  incomplete,  and  would  suggest  that  this  Association 
continue  this  Committee  over  another  year.  I  would  also  suggest  that  the  incoming  presi- 
dent appoint  two  more  members  on  this  Committee,  making  the  number  five  instead  of  three, 
and  that  the  two  additional  committeemen  be  among  those  that  have  had  good  experience 
with  both  the  steel  and  iron  flues. 

14 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


The  President :   Mr.  Sarver  was  on  that  Committee,  too. 

Mr.  Sarver:   Let  the  Secretary  read  the  report,  please. 

In  submitting  to  you  our  report  the  undersigned  Committee  on  the  above  subject  would 
respectfully  present  the  following: 

Our  personal  experience  and  our  investigations  have  furnished  us  such  a  wide  difference 
of  opinion,  relative  to  the  two  metals  mentioned  in  this  subject,  that  it  proved  quite  inter- 
esting as  well  as  a  hard  problem  for  the  Committee  to  determine  anything  like  a  satisfactory 
report;  hence,  it  was  decided  so  to  present  this  paper  to  the  Convention,  giving  our  personal 
experiences  as  well  as  those  of  other  members,  thereby  affording  an  opportunity  for  general 
discussion  among  all  the  members  of  the  Convention  with  the  object  in  view  that  by  general  dis- 
cussion we,  the  Committee,  would  profit  by  the  information  obtained  as  well  as  other  members. 

We  are  also  of  the  opinion  that  the  introduction  of  the  steel  flue  is  not  as  widely  known 
as  the  iron  flue,  consequently  the  ultimate  possibilities  are  yet  to  reach  a  good  many  of  us 
who,  as  yet,  have  not  had  sufficient  experience  to  determine  which  of  the  two  metals  has 
proven  the  most  successful  in  a  general  way,  in  economy,  as  well  as  securing  the  best  service. 

The  following  report  from  Mr.  B.  F.  Sarver  of  the  Pennsylvania  Lines,  Fort  Wayne, 
Ind.,  will  be  of  interest  to  the  members  relative  to  steel  flues.  Mr.  Sarver  has  this  to  say: 

Mr.  Chairman:  The  locomotive  at  the  present  time  is  required  to  carry  almost  double 
the  steam  that  it  was  a  few  years  ago,  and  as  a  matter  of  safety,  those  in  charge  of  the  motive 
power  department  should  advocate  the  use  of  the  highest  class  of  material  obtainable,  having 
in  view,  at  all  times,  economy  and  safety. 

In  regard  to  seamless  cold-drawn  flue  tubes,  I  might  say  that  the  steel  is  made  by  the 
open  hearth  process  and  must  be  of  the  finest  quality  that  can  be  purchased,  otherwise  it 
cannot  be  pierced.  It  is  always  uniform  in  quality,  and  as  you  do  away  with  the  welding  of 
the  flues  it  makes  a  stronger  tube  than  the  ordinary  iron  tube.  It  expands  and  beads  per- 
fectly, and  in  service  the  tubes  hold  their  position  in  the  flue-sheet  much  better  than  the 
softer  product.  The  steel  tubes  are  truer  in  size  and  gauge  than  the  welded  ones,  and  are  free 
from  the  objectionable  scale  caused  by  welding,  and  the  surface  defects  can  more  readily 
be  found. 

The  surfaces  of  the  steel  flues  are  so  densified  that  they  are  not  so  liable  to  be  affected 
by  pitting  and  corrosion,  caused  by  the  foreign  substances  in  the  water.  They  are  very 
readily  welded  and  can  be  installed  in  a  boiler  at  a  less  expense  than  the  iron  tubes. 

Although  the  steel  makers  do  not  guarantee  their  steel  to  run  below  .04  per  cent  in  sul- 
phur and  .03  per  cent  in  phosphorus,  I  give  you  below  the  maximum  and  minimum  carbons 
taken  from  sixteen  heats,  made  by  steel  makers  for  steel  tubing: 

Carbon 10%  Carbon 16% 

Phosphorus 008%  Phosphorus 01% 

Manganese  .  .  .  . 39%  Manganese . 49% 

Sulphur. 03%  Sulphur. 025% 

And  in  neither  test  the  sulphur  showed  above  .03  per  cent  and  the  phosphorus  above 
.017  per  cent. 

15 


THE 


MODERN 


BOILER 


TUBE 


I  might  state  that  a  great  many  of  the  large  railroad  systems  of  this  country  are  using 
almost  exclusively  the  seamless  cold-drawn  tubes  for  safe  ends.  And  as  a  great  many  of  the 
roads  have  large  quantities  cf  charcoal  iron  tubes  in  service,  in  looking  this  matter  up  I  find 
they  weld  very  readily  into  steel. 

It  is  generally  understood  that  the  end  of  the  tube,  especially  the  fire-box  end,  has  to 
stand  the  most  severe  punishment,  and  if  the  railroads,  generally  speaking,  have  selected  the 
seamless  tube  for  the  purpose  of  safe  ends,  they  must  recognize  in  it  a  quality  superior  to 
iron.  I  cannot  see  why,  at  a  less  expense  than  iron,  it  would  not  be  the  most  economical 
body  tube  for  locomotives. 

The  physical  quality  of  seamless  cold-drawn  steel  tubes  is  as  follows: 

Tensile  strength,  pounds  per  square  inch 50,000  to  60,000 

Elastic  limit,  pounds  per  square  inch 80,000  to  35,000 

Elongation  in  eight  inches 20%  to  25% 

I  might  further  say  that  after  extensive  tests  made  by  the  Steam  Engineering  Depart- 
ment of  the  United  States  Navy,  they  recommended  some  years  ago  seamless  cold-drawn 
steel  tubing  for  the  boilers  of  their  battleships.  This  is  also  a  fact  with  all  the  great  navies 
of  the  world ;  their  steam  boilers  are  all  fitted  with  seamless  cold-drawn  steel  tubing. 

I  believe  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when  the  superintendent  of  motive  power  as  well  as 
the  boiler-maker  foreman  will  all  specify  seamless  cold-drawn  steel  tubing  for  all  purposes. 

One  of  the  lines  with  which  I  am  connected  used  steel  tubing  for  safe  ends  exclusively. 
Since  the  adoption  of  steel  at  this  particular  place  they  have  increased  their  flue  mileage  at 
least  25  per  cent.  The  maintaining  and  calking  of  flues  in  engine  house  has  also  been  reduced 
the  same  proportion,  25  per  cent.  I  have  experienced  no  difficulty  whatever  in  welding  the 
steel  safe  ends  to  iron  flues. 

Below  you  will  find  a  chart  showing  five  passenger  as  well  as  five  freight  engines  with 
the  mileage  made  with  iron  flues,  as  well  as  steel  safe  ends,  we  applied. 


Mileage  made,  Iron  Flues 

Mileage  made,  Steel  Flues 

Steel  over  Iron 

1  Passenger 

60,299 

108,478 

48,179 

1 

96,273 

103,330 

7,059 

1 

41,684 

115,723 

74,039 

1 

50,128 

87,524 

37,396 

1 

84,561 

120,088 

.35,527 

1  Freight 

33,260 

55,063 

21,803 

1 

39,390 

76,788 

37,398 

1 

46,371 

54,639 

8,268 

1 

30,614 

59,967 

29,353 

1 

28,130 

50,014 

21,884 

10 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


I  will  conclude  by  saying  that  my  experience  in  this  particular  line,  with  what  I  have 
been  able  to  find  in  looking  this  matter  up,  and  also  with  the  increased  flue  mileage  shown  in 
the  above  chart,  I  cannot  help  but  say  that  we  are  coming  to  the  use  of  steel  flues  very  rapidly. 

Mr.  Clement  Ryan,  of  the  Union  Pacific  Railway,  Omaha,  Neb.,  also  presents  the  fol- 
lowing report: 

Mr.  Chairman:  I  hereby  beg  to  submit  the  following  on  the  above  subject,  and  hope 
that  it  will  at  least  open  up  a  line  of  discussion  that  will  be  of  benefit  to  all  concerned. 

Regarding  the  use  and  value  of  steel  in  comparison  with  iron  flues,  beg  to  say  that  in  my 
opinion  iron  is  the  best  for  all  purposes,  especially  as  regards  pitting.  We  have  had  a  great 
deal  of  experience  on  the  Union  Pacific  with  both  iron  and  steel  tubes,  and  find  the  steel  so 
badly  pitted  after  a  service  of  from  eight  to  twelve  months  as  to  necessitate  75  per  cent  of 
the  flues  to  be  scrapped,  while  iron  flues  running  over  the  same  district  and  under  same  water 
conditions  last  for  years.  I  would,  therefore,  respectfully  recommend  the  use  of  iron  flues 
with  steel  safe  ends,  as  the  steel  safe  ends  in  fire-boxes  stand  the  heat  better  than  iron.  It  is 
standard  on  the  Union  Pacific  to  use  iron  flues  with  steel  safe  ends  for  fire-box,  and  the  results 
have  been  good. 

The  welding  of  steel  and  iron  flues  requires  a  good  deal  of  attention,  as  the  heating  of 
these  two  metals  is  not  the  same,  and  we  have  had  a  good  deal  of  trouble  in  the  past  welding 
steel  safe  ends  to  iron  flues.  We  would  find  after  the  weld  was  made  that  at  a  point  about 
one-half  inch  from  the  weld  the  steel  would  be  cracked  sometimes  half  way  around  the  flue. 
To  overcome  this  difficulty  will  say,  that  after  the  steel  piece  has  been  fitted  to  the  flue 
and  put  in  the  fire,  it  should  never  be  removed  until  it  is  ready  to  weld,  because  immediately 
it  comes  in  contact  with  the  air  and  is  then  replaced  in  the  fire,  a  certain  per  cent  of  the  weld- 
ing power  is  destroyed.  Respectfully  submitted, 

M.  O'CONNOR,  Chairman, 
B.  F.  SARVER, 
CLEMENT  RYAN. 

The  President:  You  have  heard  the  report  of  the  Committee  and  also  the  recommenda- 
tion of  the  Chairman.  What  do  you  wish  to  do  with  the  report? 

Mr.  Lucas:  I  move  that  the  subject  of  this  report  be  continued  for  another  year.  The 
proposition  is  a  new  one,  and  a  good  one,  and  one  we  will  always  have  before  us.  I  believe 
we  ought  to  go  into  it  thoroughly,  and  I  suggest  that  the  Committee  be  increased  by  the 
addition  of  two  members. 

The  motion  was  seconded. 

The  President:  The  motion  before  the  house  is  that  the  report  from  the  Committee  on 
Steel  versus  Iron  Flues  be  accepted,  with  thanks  to  the  Committee,  and  the  Committee  be 
continued  one  year  with  the  addition  of  two  members,  making  it  five.  Do  the  members 
wish  me  to  appoint  the  other  two? 

Mr.  Smythe:  Two  of  the  members  of  this  Committee  expressed  themselves  in  the  report 
and  they  disagreed.  Do  I  understand  that  we  accept  the  report  and  agree  that  they  are  both 
right? 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


The  President:  No,  we  cannot  do  that.  We  are  accepting  their  report  as  presented. 
They  have  given  us  the  best  information  and  conclusion  they  could.  If  the  Committee  is 
continued  they  will  still  be  gathering  information.  We  are  not  satisfied  with  what  we  have 
so  far,  but  it  is  the  best  they  could  furnish  us  for  the  time  and  experience  they  have  had. 
So  we  continue  the  Committee  with  the  addition  of  two  more  members  to  make  still  deeper 
investigation  and  report  at  the  next  Convention. 

Mr.  Smythe:  No  doubt  the  charcoal-iron  tube  people  are  perfectly  satisfied  to  give 
the  steel  flue  another  year's  trial  and  let  it  speak  for  itself;  but  I,  for  one,  would  dislike  to 
take  any  part  in  deciding  which  one  is  the  best.  I  think  we  came  here  for  other  purposes 
than  to  advertise  any  one  make  of  an  article  or  material ;  so  I  don't  think  that  the  charcoal- 
iron  people  are  a  bit  worried  about  being  given  another  year's  trial. 

Mr.  Goodwin:  I  would  think  that  the  motion  should  read  "received"  instead  of 
"accepted,"  and  that  would  clear  it  up.  There  is  no  final  report,  and  the  Committee  is  to  be 
continued  so  that  the  subject  is  still  open.  In  reference  to  the  appointment  of  the  Com- 
mittee, it  would  be  well  enough  for  the  new  President  to  appoint  the  two  new  members.  I 
believe  our  Chairman  would  be  glad  to  have  the  new  President  receive  all  the  honors  that 
belong  to  his  office. 

Mr.  Sarver:  I  do  not  think  it  is  the  duty  of  any  committee  to  recommend  whether  steel 
or  iron  should  be  used.  It  is  not  the  sense  of  my  report  at  all.  When  you  appoint  a  com- 
mittee on  a  subject  and  ask  that  committee  whether  steel  or  iron  is  best,  they  must  certainly 
say  one  thing  or  the  other.  What  is  left  for  a  committee  to  do  if  they  do  not  do  that?  It  is 
nothing  to  me  who  furnishes  the  steel,  whether  it  be  Mr.  Smythe  or  Mr.  Goodwin.  My 
report  does  not  specify  that  we  shall  use  the  steel  those  men  make,  or  any  other  makes  of 
steel.  The  topic  to  my  mind  was  this:  Whether  this  Committee  thought  steel  or  iron  flues 
were  best,  and  I  gave  you  just  exactly  what  my  experience  has  been.  From  my  experience, 
from  the  figures,  and  from  the  mileage  and  the  service  that  we  have  obtained  from  steel  safe 
ends,  it  would  be  impossible  for  me  to  come  here  and  advocate  iron;  and  if  I  am  not  allowed 
to  give  in  my  report  the  conditions  that  exist,  you  might  as  well  not  have  a  committee.  I 
cannot  come  here  and  say  iron  flues  are  what  I  want  when  those  of  steel  have  run  from  25 
to  35  per  cent  more  than  iron  in  actual  service.  I  only  put  in  the  paper  what  I  know  to  be 
actual  facts.  Another  thing  has  come  up  since  I  wrote  that  report.  We  had  an  engine  that 
ran  40,000  miles  with  iron  flues.  We  took  it  into  the  shop  and  applied  steel  safe  ends.  It 
has  run  72,000  miles  and  is  running  yet.  So  you  see  that  I  cannot  come  here  and  say  that 
iron  flues  are  as  good  as  steel.  (Applause.) 

Mr.  Lucas:  I  believe  what  the  gentleman  has  just  said  is  just  exactly  what  we  want  to 
know.  The  Committee  has  certainly  made  a  good  report.  They  have  given  us  all  the  infor- 
mation they  can.  They  have  not  specified  anybody's  make,  but  they  should  specify  whether 
it  was  steel  or  iron.  I  don't  think  the  Committee  has  anything  to  feel  sorry  about  in  this 
respect,  at  all. 

Mr.  Brown :  It  is  my  opinion  that  when  these  questions  arise  before  the  body  for  recom- 
mendation, we  ought  not  to  lose  sight  of  conservatism.  In  my  yard  conditions  are  not  the 

18 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


same  as  in  your  yard.  There  are  members  who  can  take  either  kind  of  flues  and  give  good 
reports  as  to  their  use  in  their  jurisdiction.  I  don't  see  how  this  assembly  can  adopt  or  rec- 
ommend what  material  we  shall  use.  The  railroad  company  which  I  represent  covers  a  vast 
area  of  country.  We  have  good  water  and  bad  water  districts.  You  have  heard  the  good 
results  reported  by  Mr.  Sarver  of  the  service  steel  flues  have  rendered  his  company.  I  pre- 
sume we  have  members  here  who  could  give  us  a  report  of  the  good  service  iron  flues  have 
given. 

Mr.  Hemphill:   I  rise  to  a  point  of  order.    Is  there  a  motion  before  the  house? 

The  Chairman:  I  believe  there  is.  I  put  the  motion  and  then  asked  whether  the  Con- 
vention was  ready  for  the  question.  We  are  open  for  discussion  as  long  as  anybody  wants 
to  talk.  Mr.  Brown,  continue. 

Mr.  Brown:  I  don't  believe  that  I  am  out  of  order.  All  questions  are  debatable  before 
being  put  to  a  vote.  That  is  parliamentary  rule.  I  want  to  cite  you  conditions  on  the  Louis- 
ville &  Nashville  Railroad.  I  don't  see  how  we  could  conscientiously  recommend  the  adop- 
tion of  any  material.  It  is  only  recently  that  I  had  to  throw  out  flues  weighing  22  pounds  to 
the  foot — that  were  practically  new.  There  ought  to  be  a  long  life  in  store  for  those  flues, 
but  the  defect  was  on  account  of  the  action  of  the  water  upon  them.  It  caused  pitting.  We 
have  iron  tubes  in  those  same  districts  and  you  would  not  know  there  was  any  trouble 
with  them.  You  can  cite  me  as  using  both  iron  and  steel.  We  are  building  twelve  high- 
pressure  boilers  and  a  test  is  being  made  with  steel  versus  iron.  A  year  from  now  I  will 
have  information  as  to  the  results.  I  want  to  remind  you  that  it  would  be  impertinent  for 
this  Convention  to  recommend  any  material  that  would  not  be  good  in  certain  localities. 

The  President:  I  believe  there  might,  perhaps,  be  a  tendency,  and  some  members  be 
somewhat  inclined  to  believe  that  your  Chairman  has  been  influenced  in  this  matter.  I  am 
not  of  that  sort  of  makeup.  I  am,  perhaps,  rather  sensitive.  When  I  appointed  this  Com- 
mittee, I  did  so  fully  and  solely  for  the  interest  of  this  organization.  When  elected  President 
of  this  organization  no  subjects  were  put  before  me.  I  selected  them.  The  members  of  this 
Committee  made  just  as  able  a  report  as  they  could.  What  are  these  meetings  for  if  not  for 
information?  I  have  spent  hours  and  hours  in  the  evening,  after  my  work,  and  out  on  the 
road,  to  select  these  committees.  I  have  been  turned  down,  time  and  time  again,  by 
members  who  were  asked  to  serve  on  committees,  and  had  to  take  others.  I  was  not 
connected  with  the  concern  that  I  now  represent  when  I  appointed  this  Committee, 
and  had  no  thought  of  going  with  any  company  of  its  kind.  Some  of  our  members 
talk  as  if  I  appointed  this  Committee  just  to  bring  out  this  subject,  in  order  to  make 
recommendations  for  the  adoption  of  certain  material.  That  is  not  the  principle  of 
this  Association.  We  have  no  line  of  material  to  recommend.  We  are  here  to  discuss  whether 
the  material  has  given  satisfaction  or  not,  and  if  there  is  anything  in  the  line  of  an  evil,  to 
eliminate  it  and  determine  the  remedy  to  be  applied.  It  is  our  duty  to  look  into  it.  When 
this  Committee  was  appointed  I  was  general  foreman  boiler  maker  of  the  Missouri  Pacific 
Railway.  I  found  in  certain  places  in  the  country  that  steel  would  not  give  the  same  satis- 
faction as  iron;  and  that  steel  would  give  satisfaction  in  certain  parts  of  the  country  where 
iron  would  not.  What  I  wanted  to  do  was  to  bring  out  before  this  Association  what  steel 
and  iron  had  been  doing.  (Applause.) 

19 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Mr.  Goodwin:  I  can  fully  realize  the  embarrassing  position  of  our  President,  and  I  want 
the  floor  just  long  enough  to  express  my  opinion  about  these  facts.  I  don't  believe  we  have 
in  this  Association  a  more  conscientious,  or  a  man  more  devoted  to  the  interests  of  this  Asso- 
ciation than  our  President,  Mr.  Conrath.  (Applause.)  I  have  known  him  for  years  and 
years,  and  always  found  him  to  be  straightforward.  I  know  that  Mr.  Conrath  had  no  idea 
or  intention  of  appointing  any  one  on  this  Committee  to  give  his  opinion  in  reference  to  one 
side  of  the  question.  I  don't  believe  that  the  members  of  this  Association  think  Mr.  Conrath 
would  do  such  a  thing.  He  is  naturally  a  little  sensitive,  because  to-day  he  is  associated  with 
the  National  Tube  people.  I  do  hope  and  trust  that  Mr.  Conrath  will  not  think  that  there 
is  a  member  of  this  Convention  who  would  consider  for  a  moment  that  he  had  any  selfish 
personal  interest  to  serve  in  making  these  appointments,  or  that  he  sought  to  give  advantage 
to  one  or  the  other  side.  His  only  object  was  to  bring  out  the  true  facts  and  the  true 
conditions,  and  the  honest  opinions  of  the  members  of  this  Committee.  I  spoke  a 
moment  ago  of  the  appointment  of  the  other  Committee.  I  did  that  simply  because  I  was 
fully  aware  of  the  fact  that,  possibly,  it  might  be  embarrassing  on  the  part  of  the  President 
to  appoint  the  other  two  committeemen,  as  he  might  think  there  would  be  some  criticism 
or  reflection  with  reference  to  it.  I  believe  it  would  be  more  appropriate  for  the  incoming 
President  to  fill  this  Committee.  I  hope  Mr.  Conrath  will  not  assume  that  there  is  a 
member  in  this  hall  who  feels  that  he  would  do  anything  wrong  whatever  in  making  appoint- 
ments. (Applause.) 

The  President:  That  is  just  why  I  asked  the  question  from  the  member  who  made  the 
motion,  because  it  was  putting  me  in  an  embarrassing  position.  I  asked  him  whether  he 
wished  me  to  appoint  the  Committee.  I  thank  you.  That  is  all  right. 

Mr.  Troy:  I  believe  we  ought  to  have  all  the  information  we  can  get  on  this  subject. 
Many  members  have  not  said  anything  at  all,  and  I  am  sure  many  are  using  both  steel  and 
iron  tubes.  Is  the  subject  open  for  debate  now? 

The  President:    The  subject  is  still  open  for  debate. 

Mr.  Troy:  I  have  had  a  little  experience  with  steel  tubes,  and  I  presume  that  in  some 
places  they  will  run,  but  not  in  my  district.  I  have  not  a  written  report,  but  I  can  give  you 
a  verbal  statement.  I  applied  a  set  of  steel  tubes  in  an  Atlantic  engine  carrying  200  pounds 
steam  pressure.  After  it  had  run  30,000  miles  I  removed  the  tubes,  and  I  had  to  throw  fifty 
of  the  bottom  tubes  into  the  scrap,  they  were  so  badly  pitted. 

Mr.  Gray :  I  do  not  know  of  a  more  live  subject  at  the  present  time  among  railroad  men 
than  steel  versus  iron  tubes.  It  is  a  pretty  serious  proposition  for  a  man  to  change  from  one 
kind  of  tubes  to  the  other,  especially  if  he  changes  the  body  flues,  because,  if  he  gets  started 
on  one  kind  of  flues  and  finds  they  are  not  suitable  for  his  district,  he  has  to  throw  away 
several  thousand  dollars'  worth.  I  would  like  to  hear  from  members  in  different  water  dis- 
tricts as  to  what  their  experience  has  been.  We  have  a  number  of  steel  body  tubes  and  a 
great  many  safe  ends,  and  as  far  as  the  leaking  and  the  life  of  the  tube  in  the  fire-box  are 
concerned,  I  have  not  been  able  to  find  practically  any  difference  in  my  district. 

Mr.  Walker:  WTas  it  not  the  motion  that  the  report  of  the  Committee  be  accepted  and 
the  Committee  be  extended  for  one  year,  with  two  members  added  to  it? 

20 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 

The  President:   That  is  right. 

Mr.  Walker:  That  motion  ought  to  be  put  before  the  house  and  carried,  and  then  a 
motion  that  the  subject  be  open  for  discussion  would  be  in  order. 

The  President :  The  motion  before  the  house  is  that  the  report  be  received  and  the  sub- 
ject be  open  for  discussion.  The  rest  of  the  motion  was  explained  before — that  the  Com- 
mittee be  extended  for  one  year  with  two  additional  members. 

The  question  was  put  and  the  motion  carried  unanimously.  . 

Mr.  Lucas:  Seamless  steel  tubes  are  rather  new  to  us  all.  I  presume  there  are  few  mem- 
bers who  have  not  a  set  of  steel  flues  in  service  undergoing  test.  Some  are  getting  first-class 
results  where  others  are  having  trouble.  We  put  in  our  first  set  of  seamless  tubes  in  January, 
1905.  We  removed  them  after  forty-five  months'  service,  168,000  miles.  There  was  no 
pitting.  Every  tube  went  back  into  the  boiler.  We  have,  about  eight  or  ten  sets  in  service 
still  doing  business,  and  have  not  found  any  of  them  pitted.  We  have  iron  tubes  that  are 
pitted  badly  on  one  of  our  divisions,  scrapping  2,400  in  six  months,  where  we  only  scrapped 
542  during  the  same  period,  on  account  of  light  weight. 

Mr.  Reddy:  Is  there  anybody  in  the  Convention  who  has  had  any  experience  with  steel 
tubes  in  connection  with  treated  water?  We  have  no  steel  tubes  on  our  road,  but  have  con- 
templated putting  in  two  sets  for  test  purposes.  We  have  treated  water  on  our  system. 

Mr.  Brown:  I  believe  I  am  the  member's  honeysuckle.  (Laughter.)  We  weld  iron 
ends  on  steel  tubes  and  steel  tubes  on  iron  ends,  and  we  have  trouble  in  making  these  welds. 
But  going  back  to  the  water  conditions  on  the  Louisville  &  Nashville.  It  is,  as  Mr.  Lucas 
states.  We  all  have  a  story  to  tell.  I  still  say  we  ought  to  be  conservative.  Speaking  of 
mileage,  I  have  iron  tubes  that  have  made  130,000  miles  between  changes  of  tubes. 

Mr.  Filcer:  We  find  pitting  on  the  tubes  on  several  divisions  of  the  C.,  C.,  C.  &  St.  L., 
both  in  steel  and  iron  tubes.  This  is  owing  to  the  condition  of  the  water.  We  have  not  dis- 
covered any  pitting  on  divisions  where  we  have  water-treating  plants.  WTe  are  getting  better 
results  from  steel  tubes  than  we  did  from  the  iron  tubes. 

Mr.  Sarver:  Mr.  President,  in  making  up  my  part  of  this  report,  I  never  took  into  con- 
sideration who  was  going  to  furnish  these  tubes.  Nobody  asked  me  that.  I  wrote  my  report 
simply  on  the  conditions  that  exist.  I  would  like  to  hear  from  Mr.  Letteri,  who  has  had  more 
experience  with  steel  safe  ends  on  the  Pennsylvania  than  anybody  I  know  of. 

The  President:  Mr.  Sarver,  we  believe  your  report  is  very  conscientious.  It  is  a  poor 
man  who  would  not  express  his  opinion  and  his  experience. 

Mr.  Letteri:  I  started  in  on  the  steel  tubes,  I  think,  in  1896.  We  made  a  three-year 
test  of  them.  Regarding  pitting,  my  experience  does  not  go  so  very  far.  We  have  very  hard 
lime  water,  and  we  all  know  that  no  pitting  takes  place  in  lime  water.  It  only  occurs  in 
places  where  they  have  real  pure  water.  As  far  as  service  is  concerned,  just  as  Mr.  Sarver 
stated  in  his  report,  the  end  of  the  flue  that  is  in  the  back  sheet,  when  the  flues  are  removed, 
is  heavier  at  the  time  of  removal  than  the  iron  flue  would  be  in  three  months'  service,  and 
the  flues  at  the  present  time  are  not  removed  on  account  of  being  worn  out,  but  simply  to 
get  the  mud  and  scale  out  of  the  boiler. 

21 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Mr.  Wanberg:  I  have  had  some  experience  in  the  last  twenty  or  more  years,  and  I  find 
that  an  engine  in  constant  service  is  not  as  apt  to  pit  the  flues  as  one  that  is  taken  out  of 
service  and  left  out  from  time  to  time.  As  between  iron  and  steel,  I  could  not  say  which 
would  pit  the  quicker.  My  attention  was  called  to  a  condenser  less  than  two  years  ago, 
which  I  applied  to  a  set  of  flues.  We  took  out  the  flues  and  found  that  an  iron  flue  put  in  less 
than  nine  months  before  was  badly  pitted,  and  was  scrapped.  I  knew  the  trouble  was  not 
in  the  water  altogether,  because  we  had  flues  that  had  given  us  better  service.  I  found  the 
dynamo  set  so  close  to  this  condenser  that  it  made  electrical  connection  between  the  two, 
and  that  was  the  cause  of  the  trouble.  That  was  two  years  ago.  I  put  in  a  set  of  the  same 
tubes  made  by  the  National  Tube  Company,  and  we  have  had  no  further  trouble  from  them. 
The  previous  trouble  was  due  to  the  electric  current,  and  not  to  the  material  of  the  tube. 
My  attention  was  also  called  to  the  west  end  of  the  H.  &  E.,  where  we  put  in  one  set  of  flues. 
In  eight  months'  service  the  entire  set  was  scrapped  on  account  of  pitting.  We  knew  it  was 
not  the  water,  because  we  had  iron  flues  that  ran  longer  on  that  same  division.  They  had 
run  for  years  and  not  caused  us  any  trouble  from  pitting.  We  investigated,  and  found  that 
a  man  was  using  blue  vitriol  in  the  water.  It  was  not  the  flue,  but  the  vitriol  this  man  used. 
The  same  thing  may  exist  on  your  road.  I  do  believe,  however,  that  the  pitting  of  flues  is 
due  a  great  deal  to  taking  an  engine  out  of  service  and  leaving  it  out  from  time  to  time.  More 
damage  is  done  in  one  week  out  of  service  than  a  month  in  service. 

Mr.  McKeown:  I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Sarver  or  Mr.  Letteri  whether  they  find  any 
difference  with  scaling  in  iron  flues  or  steel  flues— do  they  find  any  difference  in  cleaning 
with  a  flue  cleaner? 

Mr.  Sarver:   No,  sir. 

Mr.  McKeown:   Mr.  Letteri,  how  about  it;   do  you  find  any  difference? 

Mr.  Letteri:   Practically  the  same;  I  could  not  tell  any  difference  in  the  cleaning. 

Mr.  Gushing:  I  have  been  handling  steel  flues  since  about  1900,  and  I  have  also  had 
iron  flues  mixed  in  with  them.  When  I  started  on  this  subject  of  steel  flues  we  were  getting 
22,000  and  23,000  miles  out  of  a  set  of  flues.  We  put  a  test  set  in  and  got  69,000  miles.  I 
removed  the  tubes,  had  them  cleaned  and  examined,  and  found  no  signs  of  pitting.  I  also 
had  some  iron  flues,  and  found  no  signs  of  pitting  in  them.  But  in  the  last  two  years,  flues 
in  service  four  or  five  or  six  years,  show  pitting  on  both  the  iron  and  steel.  I  don't  attribute 
it  to  the  material,  but  to  laying  the  engine  up  for  a  month  or  six  weeks  at  a  time,  also  to  the 
flues  being  taken  out  of  the  boiler  and  put  outside  and  left  in  the  weather.  They  rust,  and 
that  starts  the  pitting.  I  don't  think  it  is  the  fault  of  the  steel  or  iron,  but  of  the  handling. 

Mr.  Linderman:  I  have  been  handling  steel  flues  about  six  years.  On  our  passenger 
power  with  the  iron  flues,  the  best  we  could  do  was  55,000  to  65,000  miles.  With  steel  we 
raised  our  mileage  from  110,000  to  148,000  miles.  We  have  no  pitting.  With  regard  to  Mr. 
McKeown's  question  relative  to  the  cleaning  of  tubes,  we  found  that  steel  tubes  cleaned 
a  little  easier  than  the  iron. 

Mr.  Johnston:  Some  time  ago  I  was  connected  with  a  small  road  in  the  northwest, 
now  a  part  of  the  Northern  Pacific,  where  the  blacksmith  foreman  and  boiler  foreman  were 
requested  to  order  or  specify  the  material  desired  in  their  line;  as  boiler  foreman,  I  tried 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


steel  and  iron  flues;  also  welded  steel  safe  ends  on  iron  flues,  and  vice  versa.  We  had  no 
trouble  either  on  account  of  welding  or  the  service  received,  the  steel  and  iron  flues  giving 
practically  the  same  mileage — from  40,000  to  50,000  miles;  that  is,  from  shopping  to  shop- 
ping. We  gave  the  purchasing  department  to  understand,  that  whatever  tubes  they  could 
buy  to  the  best  advantage  to  the  company  we  would  use.  I  am  now  connected  with  the 
Santa  Fe,  and  in  the  past  two  years  we  have  had  considerable  trouble  from  flues  pitting,  in 
several  instances  getting  only  eight  months'  service,  when  it  was  found  necessary  to  scrap 
them. 

Mr.  President:   Was  that  with  iron  or  steel? 

Mr.  Johnston:  Iron  tubes;  and  I  believe  as  Mr.  Gushing  does,  that  considerable  of  this 
pitting  is  caused  by  having  them  out  in  the  weather,  causing  them  to  rust  considerably,  to 
which,  in  my  opinion,  the  pitting,  after  setting,  can  be  traced. 

Mr.  Smythe:  I  believe  an  explanation  is  due  Mr.  Sarver  of  my  remarks  about  the  Com- 
mittee. I  would  suggest  to  the  Chairman  that  he  write  to  the  members  that  are  using  iron 
flues,  and  in  his  report  also  embody  a  report  from  the  iron  flues.  I  know  there  are  large  roads 
that  are  taking  out  steel  flues  and  adopting  iron,  for  what  purpose  I  do  not  know.  I  have 
not  the  experience  of  you  gentlemen,  but  I  think  that  next  year  the  Committee  should  have 
a  report  from  both  sides.  The  two  gentlemen  who  were  on  the  Committee  had  experience 
with  steel  flues,  and  there  was  nobody  who  knew  anything  about  iron  flues  at  all.  Surely 
it  ought  to  be  possible  to  say  something  good  about  iron  flues,  and  we  ought  to  hear  from  the 
gentlemen  who  have  the  information. 

The  President:   Excuse  me,  but  iron  tubes  are  mentioned. 

Mr.  Andrew  Green:  I  think  everybody  in  the  hall  has  had  experience  with  iron  tubes, 
and  I  think  those  who  have  not  had  any  experience  with  steel  tubes  will  get  good  results  if 
they  try  them. 

Mr.  James  E.  Cooke:  The  Bessemer  Railroad,  which  I  represent,  is  a  comparatively 
small  road,  yet  we  haul  the  largest  tonnage  of  any  road  in  the  United  States.  We  have 
engines  carrying  225  pounds,  and  during  the  past  eight  or  ten  years  have  used  nothing  but  steel 
tubes.  We  weld  No.  10  steel  ends  onto  iron  and  steel  tubes,  using  oil  or  coke  for  fuel.  We 
have  little  trouble  with  the  flues  breaking  after  they  are  put  into  the  boiler,  but  we  do  expe- 
rience some  trouble  with  flues  pitting.  We  find  that  iron  tubes  pit  as  readily  as  steel  in  bad 
water  districts,  therefore,  cold-drawn  steel  tubes  are  the  best  in  the  market  for  our  service. 

Mr.  Kelly:  We  have  men  here  that  use  both  kinds.  I  suggest  that  each  one  act  as  a 
committee  of  one,  so  we  will  know  what  we  are  talking  about  next  year,  and  be  able  to  recom- 
mend something  to  our  officials.  I  suggest  that  we  each  make  a  test.  I  would  also  suggest 
that  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  write  to  the  manufacturers.  I  believe  next  year,  or  two 
years  from  now,  we  will  know  just  exactly  what  we  are  talking  about,  and  I  recommend  we 
ascertain  just  where  these  pitted  flues  come  from,  and  report  the  outcome  of  the  test. 

The  President:  It  was  my  idea  that  we  would  discuss  the  matter  here,  the  members  to 
then  go  home  and  go  into  the  matter  deeper  and  find  out  where  they  are. 

Mr.  Kelly:  I  would  like  to  have  them  put  in  half  and  half  in  the  same  engine,  the  right 
side  iron  and  the  left  side  steel. 

23 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Mr.  Lowe:  As  a  representative  of  the  Canadian  Pacific  Railroad  I  will  state  that  we 
are  operating  in  the  neighborhood  of  1,500  locomotives.  The  western  lines,  which  I  repre- 
sent, have  about  740.  I  believe  I  should  have  something  to  say  in  connection  with  our  tubes 
and  the  material  used.  We  are  using  steel  tubes  except  in  those  cases  where  we  are  having 
experiments  with  other  brands.  In  the  good  water  district,  as  regards  renewal,  we  are  gov- 
erned by  the  time  adopted  for  internal  inspection  of  the  boiler.  In  the  same  districts  with 
the  iron  ends,  we  find  no  gain  or  loss  in  connection  with  either  material.  But  when  we  come 
into  bad  water  districts,  it  is  not  a  question  of  the  vitality  of  the  bead  or  security  to  the  tube- 
sheet,  but  of  having  to  remove  them  for  scale.  We  had  been  using  the  steel  tube  for  many 
years  before  I  came  to  your  Convention.  I  am  not  interested  in  one  particular  brand  of 
tubes  over  another.  Every  brand  that  is  supplied  us  for  experiment  will  get  a  fair  trial.  We 
have  practically  found  no  gain  or  loss  in  bad  water  districts,  and  in  good  water  territory  any 
flue  stays  in  long  enough  to  come  within  the  time  limit  of  internal  inspection  of  the  boiler. 

Mr.  Lucas:  In  making  this  test,  when  you  get  your  people  to  buy  a  set  of  iron  tubes, 
I  would  like  the  members  to  keep  a  record  of  the  work  done  on  each  set,  and  the  number  of 
flues  plugged  when  in  the  shop,  and  give  us  complete  data  of  what  has  been  done.  It  will 
be  well  to  state  whether  it  was  a  good  grade  of  iron  tube  against  the  steel  tube,  or  a  common 
body  grade  of  iron  against  the  steel  tube.  Let  us  show  up  everything. 

Mr.  O'Neill:  I  have  had  a  great  deal  of  experience  with  steel  tubes,  and  I  find  after 
making  several  tests,  that  by  putting  in  a  half  set  of  iron  flues  and  a  half  set  of  steel,  in  cer- 
tain districts  where  we  applied  these  flues  and  the  condition  of  the  water  was  very  bad,  we 
took  flues  out  in  about  fourteen  months.  The  steel  flues  were  pitted  so  badly  we  could  not 
put  them  back;  the  iron  flues  were  not  pitted  at  all  that  we  could  notice.  Before  this  I  had 
been  ordering  all  steel  flues.  I  am  still  ordering  some  for  safety  ends,  and  I  find  I  get  better 
service  from  the  steel  ends  than  I  do  from  the  iron  ends,  but  the  steel  seems  to  pit.  It  doesn't 
seem  to  have  any  particular  place,  either  at  the  bottom  or  top  of  the  flue.  After  noticing  it 
very  closely,  and  studying  these  little  pits,  I  think  there  is  some  kind  of  sediment  or  sulphur, 
making  a  soft  place  in  the  flue,  that  causes  it;  the  action  of  our  water  has  a  tendency  to  cut 
through.  There  will  be  a  small  pit,  and  the  flue  will  be  all  right  all  around  for  twelve  or  four- 
teen inches,  and  still  this  little  pit  eats  right  through  it.  In  the  iron  flue  we  don't  notice  that 
at  all.  However,  I  find  that  the  steel  end  does  better  in  the  sheet  than  the  iron  end, 
and  for  that  reason  we  have  adopted  the  iron  body,  welding  the  steel  end  on,  and  we  get 
very  good  results. 

Mr.  Rapp:  In  regard  to  this  proposed  test,  to  be  absolutely  fair  with  both  materials, 
I  believe  it  would  be  better,  instead  of  putting  in  one  material  on  one  side  and  the  other 
material  on  the  other  side,  to  put  in  alternate  rows.  I  conducted  a  test  several  years  ago 
with  Swedish  iron  and  steel  on  two  engines.  One  engine  had  both  injectors  on  the  right 
side  and  the  other  engine  had  one  injector  on  the  left  side  and  one  on  the  right.  I  found  in 
the  engine  that  had  both  injectors  on  the  right  side,  the  left  side  flues  played  out  first ;  and  on 
the  engine  that  had  the  injectors  on  each  side,  the  injector  on  the  fireman's  side  was  evidently 
used  most,  and  the  right  side  played  out  soonest.  I  woidd  recommend  in  this  test  to  make 
alternate  rows  of  iron  and  steel. 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 

The  President:    They  might  get  mixed  up  and  not  be  able  to  find  out  which  was  which. 

Mr.  Rapp:  The  only  way  would  be  to  make  a  chart  of  the  sheet,  and  represent  one 
material  by  an  x. 

Mr.  Elkins:  I  tried  that  scheme  a  few  years  ago.  I  put  in  a  set  of  flues,  using  iron  and 
steel  in  alternate  rows,  but  did  not  get  any  satisfaction  from  the  experiment,  for  when  they 
leaked  we  could  not  tell  which  had  started  the  trouble,  as  all  of  the  bottom  ones  would  be 
leaking;  when  we  removed  the  flues  after  eleven  months,  the  steel  flues  seemed  to  be  pitted 
a  little  more  than  the  iron  ones.  However,  we  safe-ended  the  entire  set. 

Mr.  Brown:  The  flues  that  we  applied  were  never  touched  by  the  weather.  Our  flues 
are  kept  under  cover.  In  our  mineral  districts,  where  steel  will  not  live  and  iron  will,  the 
twelve  boilers  we  are  making  I  think  will  afford  a  fine  test.  There  will  be  six  Pacific  types 
and  six  heavy  freight  engines,  both  high  pressure.  The  flues  on  one  side  will  be  iron  and  on 
the  other  steel.  For  the  benefit  of  this  Committee  I  promise  that  I  will  give  this  my  un- 
divided attention  for  the  next  twelve  months.  If  a  report  from  me  on  this  subject  will 
be  acceptable  I  will  be  only  too  pleased  to  give  it  to  them,  at  whatever  time  they  wish. 

Mr.  Lucas:  There  is  one  point  I  want  to  bring  before  the  Convention  relative  to  weld- 
ing steel  safe  ends  onto  iron  tubes.  I  want  to  know  what  they  are  going  to  put  them  up 
against.  If  you  use  a  good  iron  tube  against  a  steel  tube  it  will  be  a  more  fair  test  than 
if  you  use  common  ordinary  body  grade  iron  against  the  steel  tube. 

Mr.  J.  B.  Smith:  We  have  been  using  steel  tubes  for  the  last  eight  years.  Previously 
we  had  been  using  charcoal  iron.  We  started  in  to  buy  safe  ends  the  same  as  tubing  and  we 
got  two  or  three  more  months'  service  out  of  the  iron.  Last  fall  we  had  a  great  deal  of  trouble 
in  our  vicinity  with  bad  water  and  the  tubes  pitting,  and  our  mechanical  department  investi- 
gated to  see  what  was  the  matter.  I  thought  the  steel  flues  were  giving  us  the  trouble,  but 
we  made  a  chemical  analysis  and  it  turned  out  to  be  the  iron.  We  are  now  making  several 
tests  with  Swedish  iron  flues  versus  steel,  also  sterilized  iron  flues  and  sterilized  cold-drawn 
seamless  tubes.  So  I  don't  know  what  the  result  will  be.  I  suppose  by  the  time  of  the  next 
Convention  I  can  make  a  report.  We  are  making  a  test  now,  putting  one-half  iron  on  one 
side  and  steel  on  the  other,  but  every  other  flue  is  steel  and  iron,  steel  and  iron,  and  so  on. 

Mr.  Brown:  The  Master  Mechanics'  Convention  some  years  ago  adopted  specifications 
as  to  the  best  method,  in  their  judgment,  of  making  a  test.  This  test  we  have  accepted  and 
it  has  been  our  guide.  The  end  we  put  on  a  flue  has  to  pass  the  specification,  whether  it  be 
steel  or  iron ;  if  it  is  a  safe  end  it  passes  the  specification  and  if  it  is  a  body  flue  likewise.  This 
also  specifies  the  gauge  for  the  different  parts,  that  is,  the  body  and  the  safe  end,  and  I  think 
it  is  a  complete  test. 

Mr.  Linderman:  I  have  been  handling  steel  flues  for  nearly  six  years.  On  our  passenger 
power,  with  iron  flues,  the  best  we  could  do  was  55,000  to  65,000  miles  from  a  set  of  flues. 
After  adopting  a  cold-drawn  steel  flue,  we  raised  our  mileage  on  the  same  class  engines  to 
100,000,  with  some  engines  running  as  high  as  148,000  miles  on  one  set  of  flues.  We  have  no 
pitting.  Referring  to  Mr.  McKeown's  question  regarding  the  cleaning  of  tubes,  we  found 
that  steel  tubes  cleaned  easier  than  the  iron. 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 

Mr.  McCarrahan :  East  of  Pittsburgh  and  Erie  we  have  about  3,200  engines.  Up  to 
the  present  time  we  have  been  using  the  best  grade  of  charcoal  iron.  We  have  under  con- 
struction at  the  present  time  in  the  Juniata  shops  thirty-three  consolidation  engines,  having 
465  two-inch  tubes,  15  feet  by  2^  inches.  One-half  of  these  engines  are  to  be  equipped  with 
steel  tubes  and  the  other  half  with  iron.  One  year  from  now  I  may  be  able  to  give  you  some 
data  as  to  how  they  compare. 

Mr.  Elkins:    I  move  that  the  discussion  be  closed. 

Mr.  Brown:    I  second  the  motion. 

The  President:    It  has  been  moved  and  seconded  that  the  discussion  be  closed. 

Mr.  German:  I  have  listened  to  the  discussion  on  the  pitting  of  flues.  I  have  not  heard 
any  remedy  advanced  for  the  prevention  of  pitting.  We  use  both  steel  and  iron  flues  on  the 
Lake  Shore  system.  We  have  points  on  our  system  where  the  flues  pitted  very  badly,  but  we 
have  overcome  that  difficulty  by  the  use  of  soda  ash  and  the  frequent  washing  out  of  boilers. 

The  President:  I  want  each  and  every  one  to  take  an  interest  in  this  matter  during  the 
year,  and  write  to  the  Committee  on  this  subject  so  as  to  give  them  a  chance  to  make  a  good 
report  at  our  next  annual  Convention. 

The  question  was  put  and  the  motion  carried  unanimously. 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Official  Report 

and  Discussion  of  Report  of  the  Special  Committee  on 

Steel  vs.  Iron  Tubes 

before  the  International  Master  Boiler  Makers'  Association  in  Convention  at  Niagara  Falls,  Ontario,  May  24-27, 1910 

(See  pages  138  to  133  of  Official  Proceedings) 


Report  of  Committee  on  Steel  versus  Iron  Tubes 

The  President:  The  next  topic  for  discussion  will  be  the  report  of  the  Committee  on 
"Steel  versus  Iron  Tubes." 

M.  O'Connor,  chairman,  read  the  report  of  the  Committee. 
Your  Committee  on  above  subject  beg  leave  to  report  as  follows : 

During  the  past  year  since  our  last  Convention  at  Louisville,  Ky.,  your  Committee 
made  every  effort  to  ascertain  the  very  best  information  from  a  great  many  localities  using 
both  steel  and  iron,  relative  to  obtaining  the  most  accurate  knowledge  of  this  subject. 

We  are  pleased  to  report  that  the  returns  came  in  very  satisfactorily  as  far  as  prompt- 
ness is  concerned,  but  materially  different  in  opinion;  however,  the  greatest  number  reported 
that  as  far  as  actual  service  is  concerned,  steel  tubes  give  just  as  good  service  as  iron  tubes, 
and  vice  versa. 

Relative  to  welding,  we  have  found  to  our  satisfaction  that  where  an  oil  furnace  is  used 
there  is  no  difficulty  or  secret  in  welding  steel  tubes.  In  an  open  coke  or  coal  fire,  some  oppo- 
sition is  met,  due  to  the  impurities  in  the  fuel. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

M.  O'CONNOR,  Chairman. 

D.  G.  FOLEY, 

M.  M.  MCALLISTER, 

C.  L.  HEMPEL, 

B.  F.  SARVER, 

Committee. 


Mr.  O'Connor:  On  this  subject,  "Steel  versus  Iron  Tubes,"  I  would  respectfully  report 
that  the  paper  I  have  on  this  particular  subject  is  not  a  long  one  by  any  means,  but  simply  a 
short  paragraph,  just  enough  to  bring  the  subject  before  the  Convention  in  a  general  way. 
My  excuse  for  this  short  paper  is  that  I  was  unable  to  get  the  reports  from  the  other  members 
of  the  Committee  within  the  time  specified  by  our  Secretary:  to  have  them  sent  in  ninety 
days  before  opening  of  the  Convention,  therefore  I  deemed  it  advisable  to  say  just  enough 
to  introduce  the  subject  for  general  discussion;  however,  Mr.  President,  I  have  some  data 
on  this  subject,  and  after  I  hear  from  other  members  on  this  important  subject,  I  will  be 
pleased  to  give  it,  and  my  personal  experience  with  the  two  metals. 

27 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Mr.  B.  F.  Sarver:  I  have  a  little  report  which  I  would  like  to  read.  I  made  quite  an 
extensive  report  last  year  in  favor  of  steel  flues;  I  have  a  few  figures  here  to  verify  my  asser- 
tions made  at  that  time.  I  will  read  this  report  to  the  Convention. 

I  have  not  a  great  deal  to  say  on  this  subject  at  this  time.  You  will  remember  that  I 
submitted  quite  a  lengthy  report  on  this  subject  last  year,  and  I  am  pretty  well  exhausted 
with  the  exception  of  a  few  figures,  which  I  would  like  to  submit  to  substantiate  the  argument 
I  made  last  year  in  my  report  in  favor  of  steel  flues  and  safe  ends. 

Since  I  made  my  last  report  to  you  before  the  Master  Boiler  Makers'  Association  I  have 
gathered  some  data.  I  have  one  engine  that  has  2j/£-inch  by  21-foot  tubes  to  submit  to  you 
as  evidence  at  this  time.  This  engine  when  first  turned  out  of  shop  was  equipped  with  iron 
tubes  and  safe  ends,  making  a  flue  mileage  of  47,230  miles.  These  flues  were  then  removed 
and  the  same  flues  were  safe  ended  with  steel  safe-end  material.  After  these  flues  had  been 
applied  this  engine  made  a  flue  mileage  of  68,361  miles,  thus  making  a  gain  of  21,131  miles 
in  favor  of  the  steel  safe  ending. 

We  have  experienced  no  trouble  to  speak  of  on  account  of  flues  leaking  since  this  engine 
wa;  equipped  with  steel  safe  ends.  We  have  also  had  a  test  made  of  twenty-eight  freight 
locomotives  which  were  equipped  with  steel  tubing,  and  these  engines  made  an  average 
of  75,000  miles  per  engine. 

Our  previous  flue  mileage  in  this  particular  location,  equipped  with  iron  flues,  would 
not  average  over  50,000  miles  per  engine;  this  w^ould  make  a  gain  of  25,000  miles  in  favor 
of  the  steel  flues.  We  do  not  experience  any  trouble  in  welding  the  steel  safe  ending  in  the 
iron  flue.  We  have  also  had  a  great  deal  less  of  flue  leakage  with  steel  than  we  do  with  iron. 
I  do  not  know  that  I  have  anything  more  to  say  at  this  time. 

President  Brown:   What  do  you  propose  doing  with  the  subject? 
Mr.  Laughridge:    I  move  it  be  received  and  discussed.    Carried. 

The  President:  We  will  take  twenty-five  minutes  on  this  subject,  if  it  is  the  pleasure 
of  the  Convention. 

Mr.  Green:    We  use  iron  flues  and  steel  safe  ends  mostly. 

Mr.  Bennett:   That  is  our  practice  on  the  New  York  Central,  and  we  get  good  results 

Mr.  O'Connor:  Acting  as  your  Committee  Chairman  during  the  year  just  passed  on  the 
subject  matter  of  "Steel  versus  Iron  Tubes,"  I  am  now  pleased  to  give  some  data,  also  per- 
sonal experience  with  these  two  metals.  On  our  lines  west  of  the  Missouri  River  where  we 
have  some  bad  water  conditions,  we  have  had  equipped  during  the  past  two  years  for  experi- 
mental purposes  several  engines  with  steel  and  iron  flues,  half  and  half  in  each  engine,  or, 
if  you  please,  steel  on  one  side  of  flue-sheet  and  iron  on  the  other.  Five  of  these  engines  men- 
tioned have,  since  May,  1908,  passed  through  the  shop,  receiving  light,  heavy,  or  general 
repairs,  the  first  engine  taken  in  shops,  July,  1909,  having  following  record:  Equipped  with 
steel  and  iron  tubes,  half  and  half,  May,  1908;  removed  July,  1909;  total  number  of  tubes 
in  engine,  245;  condition  of  tubes  when  taken  from  boiler  and  carefully  inspected:  20  steel 
tubes  badly  pitted  and  scrapped,  6  iron  tubes  slightly  pitted  but  not  scrapped;  all  iron  tubes 
repierced  and  replaced  in  boiler;  all  steel  tubes  except  the  20  scrapped,  repierced  and  replaced 

28 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


at  same  location  in  boiler.  Iron  tubes,  while  engine  was  in  severe  service  during  ninety  days 
previous  to  shopping,  leaked  quite  frequently;  steel  tubes  leaked  occasionally;  efficiency 
of  beads  in  fire-box  in  favor  of  steel. 

Second  engine  equipped  May,  1908,  with  both  steel  and  iron  tubes,  located  in  boiler 
same  as  first  engine,  removed  from  boiler  October,  1909;  total  number  of  tubes  in  boiler  245; 
condition  of  iron  and  steel  tubes  when  inspected:  8  steel  tubes  badly  pitted  and  scrapped, 
no  iron  tubes  found  pitted,  and  all  tubes,  both  iron  and  steel  except  the  8,  were  repierced 
and  replaced  in  same  boiler,  same  location  as  removed  from. 

Third  engine  equipped  May,  1908,  steel  and  iron  tubes;  removed  49  tubes  from  bottom 
of  shell  (24  steel  and  25  iron  tubes)  while  engine  was  in  shop  for  light  repairs.  All  tubes  were 
repierced  and  replaced  in  boiler;  none  scrapped.  Engine  still  in  service,  giving  good 
satisfaction  with  her  tubes. 

Fourth  engine,  steel  and  iron  tubes  applied  April,  1908;  all  removed  December,  1909; 
condition  of  tubes  after  inspection:  26  steel  tubes  slightly  pitted,  20  iron  slightly  pitted; 
neither  steel  or  iron  tubes  in  condition  to  be  scrapped,  and  all  were  repaired  with  safe  ends 
and  put  in  same  location  in  boiler  as  when  removed.  Condition  of  tube  beads  in  fire-box 
end:  material  strength  of  steel  good,  material  strength  of  iron  soft  and  spongy. 

Fifth  engine,  total  number  of  tubes  289;  steel  and  iron  tubes  applied  May,  1908,  and 
all  removed  from  boiler  January,  1910.  Engine  in  passenger  service,  and  total  mileage  made 
with  these  tubes  without  any  renewals  between  May,  1908,  and  January,  1910,  103,663  miles. 
Condition  of  tubes  when  removed  from  engine  boiler  and  closely  inspected:  14  steel  tubes 
badly  pitted  and  scrapped,  49  iron  tubes,  badly  pitted  and  scrapped;  all  other  tubes  taken 
from  this  engine  were  repaired  with  safe  ends  and  replaced  in  same  location  in  boiler.  While 
engine  was  in  service  from  May,  1908  to  January,  1910,  the  tubes,  both  iron  and  steel,  gave 
us  very  little  trouble  on  account  of  leaking. 

Mr.  Lucas:    Were  the  iron  tubes  safe-ended? 

Mr.  O'Connor:    No,  sir,  they  were  new  flues;  they  had  no  safe  ends  on  the  flues. 

Mr.  Linderman:    Did  you  follow  up  your  engine-house  work  with  the  roller? 

Mr.  O'Connor:  We  use  the  roller  but  very  little.  We  use  the  sectional  expander 
entirely.  There  is  hardly  a  roller  applied  in  the  shop  unless  it  is  a  loose  flue  or  the  first 
resetting  of  flues. 

Mr.  Lucas :  We  are  using  both  steel  and  iron  tubes,  mostly  iron,  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
steel  tubes  have  been  recently  put  on  the  market,  and  we  are  getting  fairly  good  results  with 
all  classes;  we  have  had  iron  tubes  pit  and  steel  tubes  pit.  We  are  using  mostly  charcoal 
iron  tubes.  We  weld  on  a  special  charcoal  tube  for  safe  ending.  We  have  a  number  of  engines 
running  with  steel  safe  ends,  which  give  us  good  results.  W7e  made  a  report  showing  517 
engines,  all  running  with  flues  twenty-five  months  and  over.  Our  mileage  has  gone  up  to 
280,000  in  our  big  passenger  engines.  We  average  pretty  close  to  100,000  miles;  and  in  our 
good  water  we  could  do  better.  We  have  a  number  of  sets  of  steel  tubes  that  have  not  been 
in  long  enough  to  report  on  them.  On  our  own  district  we  have  117  engines  running  with, 
flues  twenty-five  months  and  over. 

29 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Mr.  Linderman:  The  New  York  Central  is  using  charcoal  iron  tubes  on  which  we  weld 
steel  safe  ends.  We  do  not  experience  any  trouble  in  welding  the  steel  to  the  iron,  and  are 
getting  the  best  of  results.  For  some  time  we  kept  a  very  close  record  of  the  number  of  defec- 
tive welds,  and  found  that  they  averaged  five  per  1,000. 

Mr.  McKeown :  I  think  I  have  probably  the  report  of  one  engine  that  has  been  running, 
giving  the  mileage  of  the  steel  and  iron  flues.  This  was  gotten  out  since  I  forwarded  the 
report  to  Mr.  O'Connor.  One  engine  has  run  49,000  miles,  and  the  other  four  have  been 
running  ten  to  eleven  months.  The  first  one  has  been  running  sixteen  months,  and  we  have 
removed  two  iron  flues  on  account  of  beads  being  partly  broken  off  and  worn  out.  According 
to  the  report  the  steel  flue  has  a  little  the  best  of  the  iron  flue  so  far.  In  the  meantime  we 
have  removed  five  flues  on  account  of  being  split  inside  of  the  sheet.  In  two  of  them  we  found 
a  couple  of  little  pieces  broken  out,  indicating  that  they  were  probably  crystallized  a  little. 
That  engine  is  still  running  to-day,  and  will  probably  run  two  months  longer.  The  iron 
flues  are  apparently  in  very  good  shape.  The  report  shows  a  little  more  work  of  the  iron 
flue  than  of  the  steel  flue.  If  the  subject  is  carried  over  to  our  next  meeting,  I  will  be  able 
to  tell  you  more  about  it.  I  am  sorry  Mr.  O'Connor  has  not  our  report  in. 

The  secretary  read  Mr.  McKeown's  statement  as  follows: 

Statement  showing  the  number  of  Steel  Tubes  worked  and  the  cost  thereof 

as  compared  with  the  Iron  Tubes  which  were  applied  to 

several  engines  for  test  purposes: 

Engine  1698  Engine  1704 

No.  Flues  Worked  COST  No.  Flues  Worked  COST 

4913  Steel $13.55  4770  Steel $13.39 

5919  Iron 15.65  5712  Iron 15.31 

Engine  has  made  34,480  miles  from  July,  1909,  to  Engine  has  made  29,294  miles   from    September, 

May  1,  1910.  .  1909,  to  May  1,  1910. 

Engine  1702  —  Detroit  Engine  1751 

No.  Flues  Worked  COST  No.  Flues  Worked  COST 

6112  Steel $17.87  5618  Steel $15.94 

7520  Iron 21.28  6773  Iron 19.89 

Engine  has  made  31,629  miles  from  August,  1909,  Engine  has  made  33,478  miles  from  August,  1909, 

to  May  1,  1910.  to  May  1,  1910. 

Engine  2008 
No.  Flues  Worked  COST 

5734  Steel ?    .    $22.89 

8547  Iron 29.91 

Engine  has  made  49,451  miles  from  March,  1909,  to  May  1,  1910. 

Mr.  L.  M.  Stewart:  On  the  Atlantic  Coast  Line  at  the  Waycross  new  shops,  where  I 
am  located,  until  six  months  ago  we  welded  steel  ends  on  charcoal  iron  bodies.  In  other 
words,  it  made  no  difference  what  material  the  safe  ends  or  flue  bodies  were  made  of,  we 
welded  together  and  had  good  results.  In  the  past  six  months  we  have  adopted  a  standard 
No.  10  gauge  charcoal  iron  safe  end  and  No.  11  gauge  Spellerized  flue  bodies.  We  weld  about 
4,000  per  month  with  Furgerson  oil  furnaces,  and  get  good  results. 

On  motion  the  discussion  was  closed. 

30 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 

Official  Report 

and  Discussion  of  Report  of  the  Special  Committee  on 

Steel  vs.  Iron  Flues 

before  the  International  Master  Boiler  Makers'  Association  in  Convention  at  Omaha,  Nebraska,  May  23  to  26,  1911 

(See  pages  193  to  204  of  Official  Proceedings) 


Steel  versus  Iron  Flues 

The  President:  We  now  come  to  the  topic,  "Steel  versus  Iron  Flues.  What  Advantages 
and  What  Success  in  Welding  Them,  and  the  Effect  of  Length  of  Tubes  and  Maintenance." 

The  President:    Mr.  Raps,  have  you  the  report  of  the  Committee? 

Mr.  Raps:  Mr.  Linderman  is  chairman  of  this  Committee  but  he  is  unable  to  be  pres- 
ent. I  wrote  a  short  report  myself  and  sent  it  to  Mr.  Linderman,  but  I  have  no  copy.  I 
was  unable  to  prepare  the  report  that  I  would  like  to  have  made,  and  I  would  suggest  that 
the  Committee  be  given  another  year's  time,  as  I  know  that  Mr.  Linderman  is  making  some 
very  interesting  experiments.  I  think  the  Committee  can  promise  you  a  good  report  if  you 
so  order. 

Mr.  President:   I  will  ask  Mr.  Kelly  to  read  the  report  of  the  Committee. 

Albany,  N.  Y.,  May  20,  1911. 

DEAR  MR.  LUCAS:  It  will  be  impossible  for  me  to  meet  with  you  at  Omaha.  Owing  to 
labor  troubles  we  are  having  it  has  been  impossible  for  me  to  get  out  the  report  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  which  I  am  Chairman.  I  have  been  working  night  and  day  for  the  last  three  months 
and  have  not  been  to  the  office  in  ten  weeks. 

I  am  sorry  to  disappoint  you  in  this  matter  and  I  assure  you  that  my  intentions  were 
of  the  best,  but  I  have  been  going  the  limit  since  the  trouble  started. 

I  am  enclosing  what  information  I  was  able  to  get  from  the  other  members  of  the  Com- 
mittee, which  may  be  of  some  use  to  the  Convention. 

Hoping  you  will  have  a  pleasant  and  profitable  Convention,  I  remain, 

Yours  truly, 

F.   A.   LINDERMAN. 
Mr.  F.  A.  Linderman,  Chairman,  West  Albany,  N.  Y. 

DEAR  SIR:  This  subject  is  of  vast  importance.  My  first  experience  with  steel  flues  was 
in  1900.  We  received  a  set  from  the  Shelby  Steel  Tube  Company.  We  applied  them  to  one 
of  our  engines;  they  worked  fine  and  gave  good  results.  We  also  welded  a  set  of  safe  ends  to 
iron  flues  without  any  trouble  whatever.  We  have  handled  the  Detroit  steel  flues,  also  with 
good  results.  We  have  five  engines  running  on  test  with  one-half  set  of  Spellerized  flues  and 
one-half  set  of  iron  flues,  which  are  giving  good  results.  We  have  no  trouble  in  welding  safe 
ends  to  flues,  nor  in  welding  steel  safe  ends  to  iron  flues. 

31 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


In  regard  to  pitting,  we  haven't  noticed  any  so  far.  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  steel  flues 
are  the  coming  thing.  I  have  a  preliminary  report  of  171  Spellerized  steel  and  171  charcoal 
iron  flues  as  applied  to  this  engine,  No.  2008.  Summarized  the  test  from  time  flues  were  first 
applied  to  this  engine,  2-12-09,  until  the  engine  was  again  shopped  and  flues  removed,  10-1-10. 

Yours  truly, 

JOHN   McKEOWN. 

Preliminary  report  of  171  Spellerized  steel  and  171  charcoal  iron  flues,  as  applied  to 
engine  No.  2008,  summarizing  the  result  of  test  from  time  flues  were  first  applied  to  this 
engine,  2-12-09,  until  the  engine  was  again  shopped  and  flues  removed,  10-1-10 

Requirements 

Flues  for  use  in  locomotive  boilers  should  be  of  such  a  character  that  safe  ends  can  be 
easily  welded  onto  the  body  of  the  flue,  without  danger  of  injuring  the  material  so  as  to  make 
it  brittle.  The  material  in  flues  should  be  of  such  a  composition  that  they  can  be  rolled  or 
prossered  without  danger  of  breaking  the  flue  inside  the  flue-sheet,  or  without  having  the 
beads  break  off.  The  flues  should  be  of  such  material  as  to  resist  the  pitting  action  of  water, 
and  should  also  resist  the  formation  of  scale  as  much  as  possible. 

Conclusions 

The  test  as  made  shows  the  first  cost  of  steel  flues  per  foot  is  28  per  cent  cheaper  than 
iron  flues,  that  the  cost  of  maintenance  of  the  steel  flues  is  38  per  cent  cheaper  than  the  iron 
flues. 

From  the  results  it  is  noted  that  seven  iron  flues  were  removed,  due  to  worn  beads,  as 
compared  with  one  steel  flue  removed  for  the  same  cause.  It  has  been  the  impression  that 
the  beads  of  the  steel  flues  were  not  as  serviceable  as  the  beads  on  the  iron  flues  on  account 
of  the  nature  of  the  material.  Previous  tests  have  been  made  in  which  it  is  shown  that  beads 
on  the  iron  flues  would  last  longer.  Other  tests  of  Spellerized  steel  and  charcoal  iron  flues 
are  in  progress,  which  will  determine  this  point  decisively. 

Seven  steel  flues  were  removed  due  to  bursting  inside  of  flue-sheet  when  being  worked. 
This  may  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  considerably  more  care  must  be  exercised  in  welding 
the  steel  flues  onto  the  safe  ends  to  be  sure  that  the  metal  in  the  steel  flues  is  not  burned, 
making  it  brittle.  They  can  be  welded  satisfactorily,  but  greater  care  must  be  exercised  in 
welding  them  at  the  proper  heat. 

The  results  of  the  present  test  show  that  the  steel  flues  accumulated  or  held  two  times 
as  much  scale  as  the  iron  flues.  This  accumulation  of  scale  would  make  the  steel  flues  less 
efficient  regarding  the  transmission  of  heat,  and  if  this  condition  prevails  in  the  case  of  other 
steel  flues  on  test  it  will  be  a  heavy  argument  against  their  usage. 

By  referring  to  the  attached  table  of  results  it  is  noted  that  the  loss  of  weight  due  to 
corrosion  and  cutting  off  the  beads,  when  removing  the  flues,  is  1.22  pounds  per  flue  for  the 
iron  flues  and  1.79  per  flue  for  the  steel  flues.  The  steel  flues  were  somewhat  heavier  when 
first  applied,  but  from  the  test  made  it  could  not  be  ascertained  just  why  the  loss  in  weight 
on  the  steel  flues  should  be  greater. 


THE 


MODERN 


BOILER 


TUBE 


Tests 

Engine  2008,  which  left  Galion  shop  February  12,  1909,  was  equipped  on  the  right  side 
with  171  Spellerized  steel  flues,  on  the  left  side  with  171  charcoal  iron  flues,  for  comparison. 
These  flues  were  removed  about  October  1,  1910,  when  engine  was  again  shopped  for  T.  B 
M.  F.  repairs.  The  length  of  service  was  approximately  nineteen  and  one-half  months,  with 
a  mileage  of  64,460  miles. 

Preliminary  reports  have  been  furnished  each  month  showing  the  number  of  flues  worked 
and  cost  of  working.  The  complete  figures  have  been  tabulated  and  are  attached,  and  show 
the  number  of  flues  worked  and  the  cost  per  month  since  the  flues  were  applied. 

A  blue-print  is  attached  showing  the  flue  arrangement,  also  showing  location  of  certain 
flues  which  failed  in  service. 

A  tabulated  statement  is  attached  which  shows  the  results  of  the  steel  and  iron  flues. 
This  sheet  shows  figures  obtained  in  regard  to  weights  of  flues  when  applied  and  weights  of 
flues  after  removal,  before  and  after  cleaning. 

Sheet  showing  work  necessary  to  keep  flues  in  engine  2008  in  repair;    171  Speller- 
ized and  171  iron  flues  were  applied  to  this  engine,  2-12-09. 


Month 

IRON       FLUES 

STEEL      FLUES 

No. 
Worked 

Time 
Required 

Cost 
Total 

Cost 
Per  100 

No. 
Worked 

Time 
Required 

Cost 
Total 

Cost 
Per  100 

March 

319              2-55 

.85 

.497 

310             2-59 

.83 

.484 

April 
May 

556              8-05 
390             5-52 

2.39 
1.76 

1.40 
1.03 

357             3-40 
263             4-43 

1.09 
1.45 

.638 
.850 

June 

658 

8-35 

2.54 

1.51 

556 

6-53 

2.11 

1.24 

July 
Aug. 
Sept. 
Oct. 

643 
655 
523 
704 

9-31 
6-07 
5-21 

7-42 

2.13          1.85 
2.01          1.18 
1.64            .96 
2.31          1.35 

557 
339 
372 
564 

9-11 
5-41 
4-44 
6-15 

2.80 
1.87 
1.41 
1.90 

1.64 
1.09 

.825 
1.11 

Nov. 

983            12-09             3.66          2.14 

458 

4-33 

1.39 

1.813 

Dec. 

988 

9-38 

2.89          1.69 

1,061             9-46 

2.97 

1.74 

Jan. 

528              6-15 

1.93          1.13 

509 

6-20 

1.52 

.89 

Feb. 

390             3-10 

.93 

.543 

425 

3-50 

1.15 

.67 

March 
April 
May 
June 

1,112 
1,086 
1,290 
1,383 

9-30 
12-52 
12-20 
14-46 

2.89          1.69 
3.87          2.26 
3.73          2.18 
4.48          2.62 

1,043 
781 
760 
766 

10-17 
7-08 
5-30 
6-18 

3.12 
2.15 
1.67 
1.93 

1.82 
1.23 
.975 
1.12 

July 

1,297            18-54 

5.97          3.48 

544 

5-15 

1.58 

.925 

Aug. 
Sept. 

1,090 
982 

14- 
11-55 

4.36          2.55 
3.62          2.12 

550 
271 

5-35 
2-20 

1.76 
.70 

1.03 
.41 

Total 

15,472 

179-35 

53.96 

32.18 

10,486 

111-58 

1 

33.40 

19.80 

33 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Result  of  Test 

Steel  Flues  Iron  Flues 

Number  applied 171  171 

Average  weight  per  flue  when  applied,  pounds 41.1  37 . 12 

Average  weight  when  removed,  with  scale,  pounds 43 . 28  37 . 86 

Average  weight  when  removed,  clean,  pounds 39 . 31  35 . 9 

Weight  of  scale  held  by  each  flue,  pounds 3 . 97  1 . 96 

Weight  lost  due  to  corrosion  and  cutting  beads  off  when  removing,  per 

flue,  pounds 1 . 79  1 . 22 

First  cost  of  Flues  per  foot $        .09  $        .125 

Total  first  cost 243 . 00  342 . 00 

Total  cost  of  maintenance 33 . 40  53 . 96 

Cost  per  engine  (with  all  flues  iron  or  steel) 552.50  791 .92 

Flues  removed,  due  to  bursting  inside  of  flue-sheet  while  working ....  7  0 

Flues  removed,  due  to  worn  beads 1  7 

Total  mileage  made  by  engine 64,460  64,460 

Remarks:  Engine  failure,  one,  7-29-10,  due  to  flues  leaking,  causing  one  and  one-half 
hours'  delay  to  west  bound  freight  train. 

Mr.  Goodwin:    I  move  that  the  report  be  received  and  opened  for  discussion.    Carried. 

Mr.  Goodwin:  I  see  here  is  a  report  which  claims  that  on  one  side  the  accumulation  of 
scale  was  greater  on  the  steel  than  on  the  iron  tubes.  I  wish  to  ask  which  side  the  injector 
is  on  that  particular  engine. 

Mr.  McKeown:   On  the  left  side. 

Mr.  Goodwin:  And  all  the  water  that  was  applied  to  the  boiler  went  in  on  the  steel 
side,  then? 

Mr.  McKeown:  Our  engineers  are  responsible  for  the  water  going  into  the  boiler; 
therefore  it  is  natural  for  them  to  use  the  right  hand  injector  most,  and  that  is  why  I  think, 
probably,  there  is  a  little  more  scale  on  the  steel  flues. 

Mr.  Goodwin :   Do  I  understand  that  it  is  usual  for  the  engineer  to  work  the  injector? 

Mr.  McKeown:  Both  work.  I  think  they  use  a  little  of  both.  They  work  the  injector 
on  the  engineer's  side  the  most. 

Mr.  Hodges:  And  invariably  when  it  is  possible  the  engineer  wishes  to  have  the  fireman 
work  the  water,  and  Mr.  McKeown  says  that  the  injector  on  the  right  side  was  used  the 
most.  From  experience  I  have  had  and  conversation  with  engineers,  as  a  rule  the  fireman 
works  the  water  and  the  engineer  keeps  the  injector  open  in  case  the  left  side  fails. 

Mr.  McKeown:  As  a  general  thing  the  engineer  is  responsible  and  works  the  right  hand 
injector  the  most.  If  anything  goes  wrong  with  the  right  hand  injector  he  has  the  other  one 
to  fall  back  on.  That  is  why  I  think  probably  there  is  a  little  more  scale  on  the  steel  flues. 

Mr.  Goodwin:  In  applying  those  tubes,  were  they  first  weighed?  Did  you  weigh  the 
new  steel  tubes  and  the  new  iron  tubes  when  you  took  them  out?  How  did  you  find  out  that 
there  was  more  scale  on  the  steel  than  on  the  iron? 

34 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Mr.  McKeown:  According  to  the  weight,  that  is  the  way  it  averages  up.  You  could 
not  notice  very  much  difference  by  looking  at  them  with  the  naked  eye. 

Mr.  Goodwin:  When  you  applied  them  the  second  time  do  you  remember  whether  the 
steel  weighed  more  than  the  iron? 

Mr.  McKeown :   I  believe  the  report  shows  that  the  steel  tubes  are  heavier. 

Mr.  Raps:  I  think  I  owe  the  gentlemen  of  the  Convention  an  explanation.  I  asked  a 
gentleman,  whom  I  supposed  knew,  whether  the  Chairman  on  this  subject  had  made  a  report, 
and  he  said  he  had  not.  I  naturally  supposed  there  was  nothing  before  the  Convention 
until  it  was  brought  out  here  this  morning.  That  is  how  I  came  to  make  the  remarks  I  did. 

Mr.  Kelly:  Some  three  years  ago  we  started  dealing  with  iron  and  steel  flues,  and  our 
experience  with  iron  flues  is  that  we  cannot  get  an  iron  flue  that  will  stand  expanding  with- 
out splitting.  The  material  in  the  iron  flue  seems  to  be  all  right,  but  it  is  simply  impossible 
to  maintain  engines  in  service  without  splitting  the  flues  in  the  prossering.  Take,  for  in- 
stance, engines  coming  right  from  the  locomotive  works,  and  the  first  time  we  expand  them 
they  split  in  the  lap  weld.  The  steel  flue,  the  seamless  steel  flue  I  prefer,  will  not  do  that, 
and  in  our  experience  as  to  beads  with  all  kinds  of  steel  flues,  the  iron  had  a  shade  the  best 
of  it,  but  I  believe  that  in  a  steel  flue  without  a  seam  they  will  work  up  easily  without  work- 
ing the  sheet  too  much.  I  don't  believe  in  getting  in  there  with  a  big  sledge  hammer.  From 
my  experience  I  think  that  an  iron  flue  with  a  steel  safe  end  is  the  proper  thing  in  bad  water. 

Mr.  McKeown:  I  have  heard  of  different  men  having  trouble  welding  steel  flues;  that 
they  would  split  at  the  weld  and  fall  off,  would  not  weld,  and  all  sorts  of  trouble.  We  have 
handled  quite  a  number  of  different  makes  of  steel  flues  and  have  had  no  trouble  whatever. 

Mr.  Lucas:  We  have  made  several  tests  of  iron  and  steel  tubes  and  have  several  tests 
under  way  now.  We  find  very  little  difference,  and  we  have  no  trouble  in  welding  either 
way.  We  are  getting  good  results  out  of  both. 

Mr.  McKeown:  We  have  an  engine  now  running  with  one  side  steel  lined  and  the  other 
side  copper  lined.  It  has  been  in  service,  I  think,  about  three  months  and  is  doing  pretty 
well  so  far. 

Mr.  Kelly:   Mr.  McKeown,  are  those  tubes  seamless  steel? 

Mr.  McKeown:   Yes. 

Mr.  Kelly:   What  gauge? 

Mr.  McKeown:    125  Master  Mechanics'  gauge. 

Mr.  Kelly:   You  have  no  trouble  with  them  at  all? 

Mr.  McKeown:   None. 

Mr.  J.  H.  Smythe:  I  did  not  intend  to  take  part  in  the  discussion,  as  the  speaker  thinks 
that  any  one  interested  in  the  sale  of  an  article  should  not  be  allowed  the  privilege  of  the 
floor  while  you  are  talking  about  his  article.  In  fact,  I  think  your  Constitution  and  By- 
Laws  state  that  very  clearly,  but  my  competitors,  Mr.  Goodwin  and  Mr.  Conrath,  seem  to 
have  things  cut  and  dried,  and  a  great  deal  to  say — showing  the  advantage  of  their  produc- 
tion, but  failing  to  show  the  disadvantages. 

The  speaker  does  not  see  how  Mr.  McKeown  could  make  such  a  showing  in  favor  of  any 
one  kind  of  tubes,  when  applied  as  Mr.  McKeown  has  in  his  engine,  as  you  all  know  that  a 

35 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


round  house  boiler  maker  will  do  his  work  as  quickly  as  he  can  in  a  hot  locomotive,  and  make 
out  his  report  to  suit  himself. 

I  wish  to  offer  an  apology  to  this  Association  for  violating  your  Constitution  and  By- 
Laws  by  taking  part  in  this  discussion,  as  I  believe  the  Parkesburg  Iron  Company's  charcoal 
iron  boiler  tube  is  able  to  stand  on  its  own  merits.  I  thank  you. 

Mr.  McKeown:  Now,  then,  Mr.  Smythe,  we  have  a  blue-print  of  the  shape  of  the  flue- 
sheet,  and  those  flues  are  numbered  one,  two,  three,  etc.,  from  the  center  line.  The  steel 
flues  are  on  the  right  side,  and  the  iron  flues  are  on  the  left  side  and  they  are  all  numbered 
on  the  blue-print.  Our  boiler  makers  are  thoroughly  instructed  when  they  go  in  to  note  what 
flues  they  report,  and  note  the  time  they  do  it  and  the  hour.  We  watch  them  pretty  closely. 
We  also  have  them  note  the  time  they  work  the  left  or  the  right  side,  and  we  have  the  blue- 
print marked  for  that  purpose. 

Mr.  A.  Green:  We  have  been  using  steel  safe  end  flues  for  the  last  five  years.  Previously 
we  used  iron  flues.  I  find  that  steel  gives  the  best  service  on  our  lines.  I  believe  that  every 
foreman  with  the  same  experience  with  both  steel  and  iron  will  say  that  steel  gives  the  best 
service  where  they  use  the  expander  to  make  repairs  to  flues  in  round  house.  The  iron  will 
not  stand  it.  I  think  the  steel  flue  is  here  to  stay,  as  it  gives  better  service  than  the  iron 
flue  especially  in  bad  wrater  districts. 

Mr.  Wandberg:  I  consider  that  I  handle  and  work  about  as  many  flues  as  any  one  man 
present,  and  I  have  as  much  bad  water,  and  therefore  as  many  bad  flues  to  work  on  as  any 
one.  I  don't  agree  with  some  of  the  remarks  made,  especially  by  Mr.  Kelly,  when  he  claimed 
an  iron  flue  wouldn't  stand  without  splitting.  I  am  under  the  impression  that  the  flue  Mr. 
Kelly  refers  to  is  simply  an  iron  body  flue.  We  have  steel  safe  ends  on  our  flues  with  a  space 
deep  enough,  and  we  have  no  trouble  with  our  flues  splitting  on  either  end;  but  I  find,  with 
the  present  coal  that  we  are  using — the  Iowa  coal — that  it  has  a  large  percentage  of  iron, 
and  unless  we  clean  out  the  flues  before  the  expander  is  put  in  we  experience  trouble  inside 
of  the  flue-sheet.  We  have  had  a  number  of  flues  burst  in  that  way,  but  that  is  the  only 
trouble  we  have  had.  As  far  as  the  iron  flue  standing  up  and  working,  with  the  steel  safe 
ends,  I  tell  you  there  is  no  difference;  but  the  iron  flue  has  a  little  the  best  of  the  steel  when 
it  comes  to  pitting. 

Mr.  Conrath:  Mr.  Kelly,  what  has  been  your  experience  with  Spellerized  versus  iron 
tubes  in  comparative  tests? 

Mr.  Kelly :  The  test  was  in  favor  of  the  iron,  but  it  was  so  little  you  could  hardly  notice 
it.  I  didn't  inspect  those  flues  alone.  I  had  the  superintendent  of  shops  with  me  and  we 
both  made  our  report.  And  we  didn't  look  at  one  flue.  We  looked  at  each  flue  and  every 
part  of  it  all  the  way  through. 

Mr.  Conrath:  How  did  the  tubes  test  out  in  the  bad  water  territory  between  Missouri 
Valley  and  Sioux  City?  This  was  a  comparative  test  with  iron,  to  ascertain  which  would 
resist  corrosion  to  the  greatest  extent.  I  have  a  record  which  is  taken  from  Mr.  O'Connor's 
report  at  the  Niagara  Falls  Convention,  and  the  numbers  of  these  engines  were  202,  1209, 
and  Wyoming  No.  3. 

Mr.  Kelly:   I  can't  recall  the  case  you  speak  of. 

36 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Mr.  Conrath:  One  was  engine  No.  202,  the  other  No.  109,  I  believe — on  the  Wyoming- 
Northwestern. 

The  President:  Ordinarily  I  am  on  the  floor,  and  always  wanting  to  say  something,  too; 
but  you  have  put  me  up  here  and  don't  give  me  a  chance  to  say  a  word,  and  I  am  getting  all 
out  of  practice.  You  know  the  claims  made  for  the  Jacobs-Shupert  Fire-box — something 
new — and  it  sounded  good.  A  few  years  ago  we  started  out  with  the  steel  tube.  It  has  been 
developing  and  we  have  been  getting  results.  We  started  experimenting  with  steel  flues  a 
little  over  six  years  ago,  and  the  first  flues  we  put  in  at  that  time  are  still  in  service.  So  far 
none  are  pitted.  We  have  iron  flues  furnished  us  twelve  or  thirteen  years  ago,  and  a  great 
many  of  them  are  still  in  the  service — a  great  many  of  them  have  been  scrapped  and  some 
are  pitted.  During  that  time  we  have  had  steel  tubes  of  all  makes  in  the  service,  and  we  have 
some  in  service  twenty-nine  months — still  in  service  and  still  doing  business.  The  same 
is  true  of  iron  flues.  We  have  steel  tubes  in  service  forty-five  months  and  still  doing  service; 
we  have  iron  tubes  in  service  that  length  of  time  and  still  doing  service;  so  I  say  there  is 
good  in  both.  It  will  take  years  to  show  what  the  actual  life  of  a  steel  tube  is  over  and  above 
and  against  an  iron  flue.  I  claimed  a  few  years  ago  that  the  life  of  an  iron  tube  was  about 
twelve  years.  Under  certain  conditions  we  have  iron  tubes  alongside  of  them  and  they  pitted 
through  in  about  the  same  time;  so  again  I  say,  we  can  get  good  results  from  both. 

Mr.  Laughridge:  I  have  not  been  taking  much  part  in  these  discussions,  but  I  don't 
want  to  get  tongue-tied.  I  don't  want  to  say  too  much  on  the  flue  business.  We  have  been 
using  steel  flues  for  seventeen  years,  and  I  think  we  are  pioneers  in  the  business.  About  six 
years  ago  our  superintendent  of  motive  power  thought  we  would  try  a  couple  of  sets  of  iron 
tubes,  to  see  if  we  could  keep  the  flues  tight.  At  that  time  we  were  having  trouble  on  account 
of  the  dry  season  in  keeping  our  flues  tight.  We  applied  those  sets  of  iron  tubes  and  they 
lasted  ninety  days,  where  we  were  getting  about  eight  months  out  of  the  others.  The  Penn- 
sylvania Railway  is  in  the  same  locality — I  think  their  record  shows  about  the  same  per- 
centage as  ours,  but  the  days  and  the  service  are  in  favor  of  the  steel  tube.  As  far  as  pitting 
is  concerned,  I  believe  that  is  entirely  a  local  condition.  We  don't  have  any  pitting  either 
on  iron  or  steel.  We  have  such  a  heavy  encrustation  of  lime  that  after  one  trip  the  tube  is 
covered  like  a  coat  of  whitewash;  so  I  think  the  question  of  pitting  is  entirely  local.  It  may 
be  that  some  localities  can  use  the  steel  and  cannot  use  the  iron,  and  vice  versa.  As  I  have 
said,  we  are  pioneers  in  the  steel  business  and  we  are  in  it  to  stay.  We  have  had  seventeen 
years'  experience  with  it,  and  we  are  not  going  to  change  to  the  iron  tube  unless  local 
conditions  change. 

Mr.  McKeown:  I  wish  to  ask  all  the  gentlemen  who  spoke  of  the  flues  pitting,  where 
they  split — in  the  boiler,  or  on  top  or  bottom  or  at  the  front  flue-sheet? 

Mr.  Wandberg:  We  find  that  the  bad  flue  is  invariably  where  there  is  the  heaviest 
pitting,  and  at  the  bottom  side  of  the  flue  also.  Mr.  Laughridge  remarked  that  the  pitting 
is  local;  but  he  also  stated,  practically,  that  a  scale  was  formed  on  the  flue  and  that  it  gave 
the  flue  no  chance  to  pit.  I  don't  agree  with  that.  I  find,  while  we  may  have  a  coat  or  two 
of  scale  throughout  the  flues,  before  doing  anything  with  that,  if  the  scale  is  knocked  off, 
pitting  is  found  under  the  scale  and  in  the  body  of  the  material. 

37 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


Mr.  McKeown:  I  find  in  our  divisions  there  is  very  little  pitting.  We  have  some,  but 
find  it  on  the  bottom  side  of  the  flues  toward  the  front  flue-sheet,  but  we  do  not  find  any  on 
top.  In  certain  localities  it  occurs,  but  we  find  it  on  the  bottom  part  of  the  flues  at  the  front 
end;  we  do  not  find  it  at  the  back  end,  nor  on  top. 

Mr.  Conrath:  The  pitting  of  tubes  is  not  altogether  due  to  impurities  in  the  water,  but 
sometimes  to  poor  circulation  and  low  temperature.  Where  the  degree  of  heat  is  below  160 
degrees  F.,  the  gases  that  enter  into  the  boiler  with  the  feed  water  will  attack  the  material, 
as  along  about  that  temperature  the  gases  are  at  their  most  destructive  power,  and  I  find 
that  in  our  modern  long  locomotive,  the  tubes  pit  to  a  greater  extent  in  the  front  end.  This 
I  believe  to  be  due  to  the  low  temperature  and  poor  circulation. 

Mr.  Chapman:  I  disagree  with  Mr.  Conrath  that  it  is  in  the  circulation.  The  circula- 
tion ought  to  certainly  work  on  all  boilers  on  railroads  alike,  when  you  are  working  your 
engines  and  flues  under  similar  conditions.  On  that  part  of  the  Union  Pacific  where  I  am, 
the  pitting  does  not  occur  in  the  front  end  at  all.  I  can  show  you  flues  that  pit  only  in  the 
first  eighteen  inches  of  the  fire-box.  I  don't  believe  it  is  in  the  circulation  at  all.  I  believe  in 
water  circulation,  and  I  know  that  the  circulation  ought  to  be  alike,  and  I  believe  you  will 
agree  it  is  alike  when  the  districts  are  the  same. 

The  President:  Most  of  this  is  due  to  local  conditions  and  electrolysis.  I  think  we  will 
have  to  close  this  subject,  as  the  time  allotted  has  long  been  exceeded. 

Mr.  Gray:  On  the  Chicago  &  Alton  we  have  used  about  all  the  different  makes  of  iron 
and  steel.  As  far  as  mileage  is  concerned  and  the  amount  of  care  we  have  to  give  the  flues 
while  in  service,  I  have  been  unable  to  discover  any  difference  between  the  iron  and  the  steel 
flue;  but  when  it  comes  to  welding  there  is  a  great  deal  of  difference.  We  have  had  consid- 
erable trouble  with  steel  flues  breaking  off  at  the  weld.  This  does  not  always  occur  in  the 
new  weld,  but  frequently  at  the  second.  After  this  weld  has  been  in  the  boiler  for  the  second 
time  and  made  considerable  mileage,  it  will  suddenly  break  off  and  cause  an  engine  failure, 
which  goes  to  prove  that  you  are  never  sure  of  what  kind  of  weld  you  have  on  a  steel  flue. 
We  have  had  many  engine  failures  owing  to  the  breakage  I  have  mentioned. 

Mr.  Laughridge:   I  move  that  the  subject  be  closed. 

Mr.  Kelly:  I  would  like  to  have  Mr.  O'Connor  answer  that  question  about  the  test  on 
the  lines  west  of  here  that  I  couldn't  answer,  with  reference  to  pitting,  in  connection  with 
engine  No.  202,  as  I  did  not  see  the  flues  when  removed. 

Mr.  O'Connor:  In  reference  to  Mr.  Kelly's  suggestion  requesting  me  to  state  to  the  mem- 
bers my  experience  with  steel  and  iron  tubes  and  what  success  we  have  obtained: 

I  assure  you,  gentlemen,  that  I  am  only  too  glad  to  report  to  the  body  just  what  the  test 
of  steel  and  iron  tubes  gave  us  on  the  C.  &  N.  W.  lines  west  of  the  Missouri  River. 

The  manner  of  making  the  tests  was  carried  out  accurately,  and  the  results  reported  to 
my  superior  officers,  according  to  their  instructions  to  carefully  inspect  and  report  all  defects 
in  either  steel  or  iron  tubes  when  they  were  removed  from  the  locomotives  having  test  tubes 
applied.  These  locomotives  under  test  were  not  all  assigned  to  any  one  district  of  our  division, 


THE  MODERN  BOILER  TUBE 


but  to  several  districts  along  the  division.  The  lines  west  of  the  Missouri  River,  comprising 
the  Nebraska  and  Wyoming  Divisions  of  the  C.  &  N.  W.  Ry.,  cover  a  large  territory  and 
consist  of  about  1,700  miles  of  railway.  So  you  can  readily  see  that  in  such  a  large  territory 
it  is  possible  to  expect  different  water  conditions,  which  naturally  bring  about  the  defects, 
pitting,  etc.,  in  our  boiler  tubes. 

Engine  No.  202,  referred  to  in  this  subject,  in  passenger  service,  running  between  Omaha 
and  Norfolk,  Nebraska,  eastern  district,  was  equipped  with  the  test  tubes,  half  and  half, 
steel  tubes  right  side,  iron  tubes  left  side.  The  mileage  made  from  the  time  the  engine  was 
equipped  with  these  tubes  until  taken  into  the  shops  for  general  repairs  to  machinery  and 
resetting  of  all  tubes,  was  103,000  miles.  In  removing  these  tubes  from  the  boiler  care  was 
taken  to  keep  them  separate,  and  also  when  placing  them  in  flue  rattler  to  clean  them. 

After  removing  them  from  the  cleaning  rattler  they  were  thoroughly  inspected,  with 
the  following  results:  49  iron  tubes  badly  pitted  and  scrapped;  14  steel  tubes  badly  pitted 
and  scrapped. 

All  of  the  tubes  mentioned  in  these  tests  were  new  tubes.  No  welded  tubes  were  applied. 
At  the  same  time  a  similar  test  of  steel  and  iron  tubes  was  made  on  one  of  our  locomotives 
on  the  western  district,  in  Wyoming,  with  results  just  the  reverse — more  steel  tubes  pitted 
than  iron  tubes.  I  could  not  say  just  at  this  time  the  number  of  defective  tubes  involved  in 
this  test,  but  the  total  number  of  scrapped  tubes  was  not  as  great  as  in  the  test  made  on  the 
eastern  district  with  engine  202. 

Attention  was  also  given  those  engines  having  steel  and  iron  tubes  applied,  relative  to 
service  obtained  at  fire-box  end,  and  after  making  personal  inspection  I  found  that  the  mate- 
rial strength  of  the  steel  tube  bead  was  better  than  the  iron,  the  latter  material  being  of  a 
more  soft  and  spongy  nature,  while  the  steel  bead  remained  almost  in  its  natural  condition; 
hence  the  results  were  that  we  had  fewer  leaky  tubes  from  the  steel  than  from  the  iron  tubes. 

A  Member:    Do  you  use  steel  safe  ends  or  iron  ends? 

Mr.  O'Connor:  We  use  both.  On  our  heavy  power  we  use  steel  safe  ends;  on  our  small 
power  we  use  iron  ends. 

Mr.  Conrath:  There  were  14  steel  against  46  iron.  I  think  I  have  the  record — only 
nine  were  thrown  away. 

A  Member:   Why  do  you  use  steel  safe  ends  on  your  heavy  power? 

Mr.  O'Connor:   We  get  better  service  in  the  fire-box  end. 

The  motion  to  close  the  discussion  was  put  and  carried. 

It  is  generally  understood  that  much  depends  on  the  boiler  tube,  especially  in  locomotive 
service,  this  being  relatively  the  weaker  member,  so  that  the  usefulness  of  the  engine  is  fre- 
quently determined  by  the  strength  of  the  weakest  tube. 


Rogers  &  Company 

Chicago  -  New  York 


LIBRARY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  BEFORE  CLOSING  TIME 
ON  LAST  DATE  STAMPED  BELOW 


USB 


LD  62A-50m-2,'64 
(E3494slO)9412A 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


